Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 to Adopt NASD Rule 2830 as FINRA Rule 2341 (Investment Company Securities) in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook, 26779-26787 [2011-11190]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the 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–Phlx–2011–57 and should
be submitted on or before May 31, 2011.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.16
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–11193 Filed 5–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–64386; File No. SR–FINRA–
2011–018]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change and
Amendment No. 1 to Adopt NASD Rule
2830 as FINRA Rule 2341 (Investment
Company Securities) in the
Consolidated FINRA Rulebook
May 3, 2011.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on April 19,
2011, Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’) (f/k/a
National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’)) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed
rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been
prepared by FINRA. On May 3, 2011,
FINRA filed Amendment No. 1. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change, as amended, from interested
persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
FINRA is proposing to adopt NASD
Rule 2830 (Investment Company
16 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
Securities) as FINRA Rule 2341
(Investment Company Securities) in the
consolidated FINRA rulebook with
significant changes. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on
FINRA’s Web site at https://
www.finra.org, at the principal office of
FINRA and at the Commission’s Public
Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission,
FINRA included statements concerning
the purpose of and basis for the
proposed rule change and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed
rule change. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. FINRA 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
As part of the process of developing
a new consolidated rulebook
(‘‘Consolidated FINRA Rulebook’’),3
FINRA is proposing to adopt NASD
Rule 2830 (Investment Company
Securities) as FINRA Rule 2341
(Investment Company Securities) in the
Consolidated FINRA Rulebook with
significant changes, as discussed below.
NASD Rule 2830 regulates members’
activities in connection with the sale
and distribution of securities of
companies registered under the
Investment Company Act of 1940
(‘‘investment company securities’’).4
NASD Rule 2830
In connection with the distribution
and sale of investment company
securities, NASD Rule 2830 limits the
3 The current FINRA rulebook consists of (1)
FINRA Rules; (2) NASD Rules; and (3) rules
incorporated from NYSE (‘‘Incorporated NYSE
Rules’’) (together, the NASD Rules and Incorporated
NYSE Rules are referred to as the ‘‘Transitional
Rulebook’’). While the NASD Rules generally apply
to all FINRA members, the Incorporated NYSE
Rules apply only to those members of FINRA that
are also members of the NYSE (‘‘Dual Members’’).
The FINRA Rules apply to all FINRA members,
unless such rules have a more limited application
by their terms. For more information about the
rulebook consolidation process, see Information
Notice, March 12, 2008 (Rulebook Consolidation
Process).
4 As with NASD Rule 2830, FINRA Rule 2341
would not regulate members’ activities in
connection with variable insurance contracts,
which are regulated by FINRA Rule 2320 (Variable
Contracts of an Insurance Company).
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26779
sales charges members may receive,
prohibits directed brokerage
arrangements, limits the payment and
receipt of cash and non-cash
compensation, sets conditions on
discounts to dealers, and addresses
other issues such as members’
purchases and sales of investment
company securities as principal.
Proposed FINRA Rule 2341 would
revise the provisions of NASD Rule
2830 in four areas. First, Rule 2341
would require a member to make new
disclosures to investors regarding its
receipt of or its entering into an
arrangement to receive, cash
compensation. Second, Rule 2341
would make a minor change to the
recordkeeping requirements for noncash compensation. Third, Rule 2341
would eliminate a condition regarding
discounted sales of investment company
securities to dealers. Fourth, Rule 2341
would codify past FINRA staff
interpretations regarding the purchases
and sales of exchange-traded funds
(‘‘ETFs’’). These proposed changes are
discussed in more detail below.
Proposed Changes to the Cash
Compensation Disclosure Requirements
NASD Rule 2830(l) governs the
payment and acceptance of cash and
non-cash compensation in connection
with the sale of investment company
securities. Among other things, NASD
Rule 2830(l)(4) prohibits members from
accepting cash compensation from an
‘‘offeror’’ (generally an investment
company and its affiliates) unless the
compensation is described in the fund’s
current prospectus. If a member enters
into a ‘‘special cash compensation’’
arrangement with an offeror, and the
offeror does not make the arrangement
available on the same terms to all
members that sell the fund’s shares, the
member’s name and the details of the
arrangement must be disclosed in the
prospectus.5
The proposed rule change would
modify the disclosure requirements for
cash compensation arrangements. As
proposed, it would no longer require
disclosure of cash compensation
arrangements in an investment
company’s prospectus or SAI. Instead, if
within the previous calendar year a
member received, or entered into an
arrangement to receive, from an offeror
any cash compensation other than sales
charges and service fees disclosed in the
prospectus fee tables of investment
5 FINRA staff has interpreted this provision as
permitting disclosure in a fund’s statement of
additional information (‘‘SAI’’). See Notice to
Members 99–55 (July 1999) (Questions and Answers
Relating to Non-Cash Compensation Rules),
Question #18.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
26780
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
companies sold by the member
(‘‘additional cash compensation’’), the
member would have to make certain
disclosures.6
FINRA believes that the proposed
amendments to the rule would
strengthen the rule’s requirements
regarding cash compensation disclosure
and would further inform investors of
the potential conflicts that can arise
from the sale of investment company
securities when a member receives cash
compensation other than sales charges
and service fees disclosed in the
prospectus fee tables of such investment
companies.7 While the current rule
prohibits members from selling
investment company shares unless
certain information regarding cash
compensation arrangements is disclosed
either in an investment company’s
prospectus or SAI, it does not impose
any disclosure requirements on the
member itself. Requiring disclosure of
these arrangements, in the detail
described below, by the member would
enable investors to better evaluate
whether a member’s particular product
recommendation was influenced by
these arrangements, and would be an
important adjunct to existing suitability,
sales practice and disclosure
requirements.
First, the member would have to
prominently disclose that it has
received, or has entered into an
arrangement to receive, cash
compensation from investment
companies and their affiliates, in
addition to the sales charges and service
fees disclosed in the prospectus fee
table. In this context, ‘‘cash
compensation’’ would include fees
6 The terms ‘‘sales charge’’ and ‘‘service fees’’ are
defined in NASD Rule 2830 and would retain the
same definitions in FINRA Rule 2341. ‘‘Sales
charge’’ means ‘‘all charges or fees that are paid to
finance sales or sales promotion expenses,
including front-end, deferred and asset-based sales
charges, excluding charges and fees for ministerial,
recordkeeping or administrative activities and
investment management fees.’’ See NASD Rule
2830(b)(8). ‘‘Service fees’’ mean ‘‘payments by an
investment company for personal service and/or the
maintenance of shareholder accounts.’’ See NASD
Rule 2830(b)(9).
7 FINRA further notes that, in October 2010, it
published a Regulatory Notice requesting comment
on a concept proposal to require members, at or
prior to commencing a business relationship with
a retail customer, to provide a written statement to
the customer describing the types of accounts and
services it provides, as well as conflicts associated
with such services and any limitations on the duties
the member otherwise owes to retail customers. See
Regulatory Notice 10–54 (October 2010) (Disclosure
of Services, Conflicts and Duties). FINRA staff
conceives that the document would include, in the
case of investment company securities, the
information required by proposed FINRA Rule
2341, but also would include disclosures more
broadly as to financial or other incentives, conflicts
and limitations on duties, as described in
Regulatory Notice 10–54.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
received from an offeror in return for
services provided to the offeror, such as
sub-administrative and sub-transfer
agency fees. Second, the member would
have to prominently disclose that this
additional cash compensation may
influence the selection of investment
company securities that the member and
its associated persons offer or
recommend to investors. Third, the
member would have to provide a
prominent reference (or in the case of
electronically delivered documents, a
hyperlink) to a web page or toll-free
telephone number where the investor
could obtain additional information
concerning these arrangements.
For new customers on or after the
effective date of the proposed rule
change, the member would have to
provide these disclosures in paper or
electronic form 8 to each such customer
prior to the time that the customer first
purchases shares of an investment
company through the member. For
existing customers at the time the
proposed rule change becomes effective,
the member would have to provide
these disclosures in paper or electronic
form to each such customer by the later
of either: (a) 90 days after the effective
date of the proposed rule change, or (b)
prior to the time the customer first
purchases shares of an investment
company through the member after the
effective date (other than purchases
through reinvestment of dividends or
capital distributions or through
automatic investment plans).
As discussed above, if a member has
received, or entered into an arrangement
to receive, additional cash
compensation, the member would have
to establish a web page or toll-free
telephone number through which a
customer could obtain additional
information concerning the member’s
cash compensation arrangements. The
web page or toll-free telephone number
would have to provide:
• A narrative description of the
additional cash compensation received
from offerors, or to be received pursuant
to an arrangement entered into with an
offeror, and any services provided, or to
be provided, by the member to the
8 See Notice to Members 98–3 (January 1998)
(Electronic Delivery of Information Between
Members and Their Customers). This Notice to
Members provides that members may electronically
transmit documents that they are required or
permitted to furnish to customers under FINRA
rules provided that the members adhere to
standards contained in 1995 and 1996 SEC
Releases. See Securities Act Release No. 7233
(October 6, 1995), 60 FR 53458 (October 13, 1995);
Securities Act Release No. 7288 (May 9, 1996), 61
FR 24644 (May 15, 1996). The Notice to Members
urges members to review these SEC Releases in
their entirety to ensure compliance with all aspects
of the SEC’s electronic delivery requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
offeror or its affiliates for this additional
cash compensation;
• If applicable, a narrative description
of any preferred list of investment
companies to be recommended to
customers that the member has adopted
as a result of the receipt of additional
cash compensation, including the
names of the investment companies on
this list; and
• The names of the offerors that have
paid, or entered into an arrangement
with the member to pay, this additional
cash compensation to the member.
The member would be required to
update this information annually within
90 days after the calendar year end. If
this information becomes materially
inaccurate between annual updates, the
member would have to update it
promptly. Also, if a customer
specifically requests paper-based
disclosure of the information provided
through a web page or toll-free
telephone number, the member would
have to deliver this information to the
customer in paper form promptly.
The proposal also would add
supplementary material that would
clarify the definition of ‘‘cash
compensation,’’ which would supersede
all prior guidance with respect to this
definition.9 The supplementary material
would provide that ‘‘cash
compensation’’ includes, among other
things, revenue sharing paid in
connection with the sale and
distribution of investment company
securities.10 The supplementary
material would specify that ‘‘cash
compensation’’ includes revenue sharing
payments regardless of whether they are
based upon the amount of investment
9 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No.
37374 (June 26, 1996), 61 FR 35822 (July 8, 1996)
(File No. SR–NASD–95–61; Proposed Rule Change
by NASD Relating to the Regulation of Cash and
Non-Cash Compensation In Connection With the
Sale of Investment Company Securities and
Variable Contracts); Notice to Members 97–50
(August 1997) (NASD Regulation Requests
Comment On Regulation Of Payment And Receipt
Of Cash Compensation Incentives) and Dep’t. of
Enforcement v. Respondent, Decision No.
E8A2003062001, June 28, 2007 (redacted decision)
(noting administrative history of current rule).
10 Revenue sharing payments can take many
different forms. For example, an offeror may make
a year-end payment to a broker-dealer based on the
amount the broker-dealer’s customers currently
hold in the offeror’s funds, or based on the brokerdealer’s total sales of the offeror’s funds in the
previous year. Additionally, revenue sharing
payments can take the form of other cash payments,
such as a payment by an offeror to help pay the
costs of a broker-dealer’s annual sales meeting. See,
e.g., Securities Act Release No. 8358 (January 24,
2004) [sic], 69 FR 6438 (February 10, 2004)
(Confirmation Requirements and Point of Sale
Disclosure Requirements for Transactions in Certain
Mutual Funds and Other Securities, and Other
Confirmation Requirement Amendments, and
Amendments to the Registration Form for Mutual
Funds) at note 17.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
company assets that a member’s
customers hold, the amount of
investment company securities that the
member has sold, or any other amount
if the payment is related to the sale and
distribution of the investment
company’s securities. As cash
compensation, members would be
required to disclose such revenue
sharing arrangements.
These disclosure requirements would
apply only to members that receive or
enter into an arrangement to receive
additional cash compensation from an
offeror. Thus, if a member sells a mutual
fund’s shares and receives only the sales
load and distribution or service fees
described in the fund’s prospectus fee
tables, and does not receive or enter into
an arrangement to receive revenue
sharing or other additional cash
compensation from an offeror, the
member would not be required to make
the disclosures specified in proposed
FINRA Rule 2341(l)(4). Likewise, a
principal underwriter of a no-load
mutual fund that sells shares directly to
investors, and does not receive or enter
into an arrangement to receive any cash
compensation beyond what is described
in the fund’s prospectus fee table,
would not be subject to the disclosure
requirements of paragraph (l)(4).
Proposed Changes to the Non-Cash
Compensation Provisions
NASD Rule 2830(l)(5) generally
prohibits members and their associated
persons from accepting or making
payments of non-cash compensation in
connection with the sale of investment
company securities, subject to certain
exceptions. These exceptions allow gifts
of under $100, entertainment that does
not raise questions of propriety, certain
training or education meetings, and
sales contests that do not favor
particular products.
NASD Rule 2830(l)(3) requires
members to keep records of all
compensation received by the member
or its associated persons from offerors,
other than small gifts and entertainment
permitted by the rule. Currently, this
provision requires the records to
include the nature of, and ‘‘if known,’’
the value of any non-cash compensation
received. FINRA proposes to modify
this requirement by deleting the phrase
‘‘if known’’ regarding the value of noncash compensation. This change would
make the provision more consistent
with the non-cash compensation
recordkeeping requirements in other
FINRA rules.11 The proposal also would
11 See recordkeeping requirements for non-cash
compensation accepted or paid in connection with
the distribution or sale of direct participation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
add supplementary material that would
clarify that, if a member or associated
person receives non-cash compensation
from an offeror for which a receipt or
other documentation of value is
unavailable, the member may estimate
in good faith the value of such
compensation.
Proposed Changes Regarding Conditions
for Discounts to Dealers
NASD Rule 2830(c) currently
prohibits investment company
underwriters from selling the fund’s
shares to a broker-dealer at a price other
than the public offering price unless
they meet two requirements:
• The sale must be in conformance
with NASD Rule 2420; and
• for certain investment company
securities, a sales agreement must be in
place that sets forth the concessions
paid to the broker-dealer.
The requirement that the sale be in
conformance with NASD Rule 2420 is
based on historical concerns that both
underwriters and dealers of investment
company securities be FINRA members.
Since the time this provision was
adopted, the laws governing brokerdealers have changed, and today
virtually all broker-dealers doing
business with the public are FINRA
members. As a result of this change, the
proposal would eliminate the
requirement that the sale be in
conformance with NASD Rule 2420.12
Proposed Changes Regarding Sales of
Shares of ETFs
In recent years, members have bought
and sold shares of ETFs, which are
open-end management investment
companies or unit investment trusts
(‘‘UITs’’) that differ from traditional
mutual funds and UITs, since their
shares typically are traded on securities
exchanges. Because ETF shares are
sometimes traded at prices that differ
from the fund’s current net asset value,
ETFs can raise issues under both the
Investment Company Act and NASD
Rule 2830. For example, Section 22(d)
of the Investment Company Act requires
dealers to sell shares of an open-end
investment company at the current
public offering price described in the
investment company’s prospectus (i.e.,
the fund’s net asset value plus any
applicable sales load). Similarly, NASD
Rule 2830(i) generally prohibits
programs in FINRA Rule 2310(c)(2), variable
insurance contracts in FINRA Rule 2320(g)(3), and
public offerings of securities in FINRA Rule
5110(h)(2).
12 FINRA is proposing to replace NASD Rule 2420
with FINRA Rule 2040. See Regulatory Notice 09–
69 (December 2009) (Payments to Unregistered
Persons).
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26781
members from purchasing fund shares
at a price lower than the bid price next
quoted by or for the issuer (for
traditional mutual funds, this price is
the fund’s next quoted net asset value).
To address these issues, the SEC has
issued a series of exemptive orders that
allow ETFs to trade on exchanges at
prices that differ from the fund’s public
offering price. The SEC also has
proposed a rule that generally would
codify the exemptive relief provided by
its orders.13 Similarly, FINRA staff has
issued letters interpreting NASD Rule
2830 that allow members to purchase
and sell shares of ETFs at prices other
than the current net asset value
consistent with SEC exemptive orders.14
The proposal would add a new
paragraph, FINRA Rule 2341(o), to
codify earlier FINRA staff interpretive
letters that permit the trading of ETF
shares at prices other than the current
net asset value consistent with
applicable SEC rules or exemptive
orders.
Technical Changes
Paragraph (b)(10) of NASD Rule 2830
incorporates by reference several
definitions under the Investment
Company Act, including ‘‘open-end
management investment company.’’ The
Investment Company Act does not
define the term ‘‘open-end management
investment company,’’ but does define
‘‘management company,’’ and divides
this term into two sub-classifications,
‘‘open-end company’’ and ‘‘closed-end
company.’’ 15
NASD Rule 2830 employs the terms
‘‘open-end investment company’’ and
‘‘open-end management investment
company,’’ as well as the term ‘‘closedend investment company.’’ These terms
are intended to have the same meanings
as ‘‘open-end company’’ and ‘‘closed-end
company,’’ respectively, under the
Investment Company Act. Accordingly,
paragraph (b)(10) of proposed FINRA
Rule 2341 incorporates the definitions
of ‘‘open-end company’’ and ‘‘closed-end
company’’ from the Investment
Company Act, rather than ‘‘open-end
management investment company.’’
Likewise, references to these terms
within NASD Rule 2830 have been
revised in proposed FINRA Rule 2341 to
13 Securities Act Release No. 8901; Investment
Company Act Release No. 28193 (March 11, 2008),
73 FR 14618 (March 18, 2008) (Exchange-Traded
Funds (‘‘ETFs’’)).
14 See, e.g., Letter from Joseph P. Savage, Counsel,
Investment Companies Regulation, NASD, to
Kathleen H. Moriarty, Esq., Carter, Ledyard &
Milburn, dated October 30, 2002, available at
https://www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/
Guidance/InterpretiveLetters/P002680.
15 See Sections 4(3) and 5(a) of the Investment
Company Act.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
26782
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
refer to ‘‘open-end companies’’ and
‘‘closed-end companies.’’
FINRA will announce the
implementation date of the proposed
rule change no later than 90 days
following Commission approval. The
implementation date will be no more
than 365 days following Commission
approval.
2. Statutory Basis
FINRA believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the provisions
of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,16 which
requires, among other things, that
FINRA rules must be designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the
proposed rule change will help ensure
that investors are informed of potential
conflicts of interest that can arise from
arrangements related to the sale and
distribution of investment company
securities.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
FINRA does not believe that the
proposed rule change will result in any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
In June 2009, FINRA published
Regulatory Notice 09–34 (the ‘‘Notice’’)
requesting comment on the rule as
proposed therein (the ‘‘Notice
proposal’’). A copy of the Notice is
attached as Exhibit 2a. The comment
period expired on August 3, 2009.
FINRA received nine comments in
response to the Notice. A list of the
commenters in response to the Notice is
attached as Exhibit 2b, and copies of the
comment letters received in response to
the Notice are attached as Exhibit 2c.17
A summary of the comments and
FINRA’s response is provided below.
Since almost all of the comments that
FINRA received on the proposal
concerned its provisions governing
receipt of cash compensation, these
comments and FINRA’s responses
thereto are further categorized by
subject matter.
16 15
U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6).
Exhibit 2b for a list of abbreviations
assigned to commenters. The Commission notes
that these exhibits are part of the filing which is
available on FINRA’s website.
17 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
Proposal is Premature and Duplicative
Several commenters argued that the
proposal regarding cash compensation
is premature and duplicative given
other legislative and regulatory
initiatives that deal with conflicts of
interest that can arise in the sale of
shares of mutual funds. Schwab noted
that the SEC previously had proposed to
require broker-dealers to disclose
certain conflicts of interest at the point
of sale when offering investment
company securities.18 Schwab also cited
legislation in Congress that, among
other things, would clarify the SEC’s
authority to promulgate rules requiring
that certain information be disclosed
prior to the sale of shares of a mutual
fund.19 GWFS and Sutherland cited
proposals by the U.S. Department of
Labor (‘‘DOL’’) under the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,
as amended (‘‘ERISA’’) to require brokerdealers and other service providers to
make certain disclosures regarding
conflicts of interest to employee benefit
pension plans, and proposed regulations
to require the disclosure of plan and
investment-related information to
participants and beneficiaries in
participant-directed individual account
plans, such as 401(k) plans.20
While FINRA is aware of the SEC and
the DOL proposals and interim final
rule that may address similar issues,
FINRA does not believe that the cash
compensation provisions are either
18 See Securities Act Release No. 8358 (January
29, 2004), 69 FR 6438 (February 10, 2004)
(Confirmation Requirements and Point of Sale
Disclosure Requirements for Transactions in Certain
Mutual Funds and Other Securities, and Other
Confirmation Requirement Amendments, and
Amendments to the Registration Form for Mutual
Funds), and Securities Act Release No. 8544
(February 28, 2005), 70 FR 10521 (March 4, 2005)
(reopening the comment period on proposed rules,
published in January 2004, that would require
broker-dealers to provide their customers with
information regarding the costs and conflicts of
interest that arise from the distribution of mutual
fund shares, 529 college savings plan interests, and
variable insurance products).
19 See Section 914 of the Investor Protection Act
of 2009. See U.S. Treasury press release of July 10,
2009, https://www.treas.gov/press/releases/
tg189.htm. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’),
which was signed into law in July 2010, included
essentially the same provision cited by Schwab. See
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, Public Law 111–203, § 919 (2010).
20 See Reasonable Contract or Arrangement under
Section 408(b)(2)—Fee Disclosure, 72 FR 70988
(December 13, 2007) (subsequently codified at 29
C.F.R. pt 2550) (‘‘Reasonable Contract Proposal’’),
and Fiduciary Requirements for Disclosure in
Participant-Directed Individual Account Plans, 73
FR 43014 (July 23, 2008) (subsequently codified at
29 C.F.R. pt 2550). The DOL adopted the
Reasonable Contract Proposal as an interim final
rule, with request for comments, in July 2010. See
Reasonable Contract or Arrangement Under Section
408(b)(2)—Fee Disclosure, 75 FR 41600 (July 16,
2010).
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
premature or duplicative of these other
rules and rule proposals. The SEC’s
point-of-sale proposal was initially
published for comment in 2004, and republished for comment in 2005; since
then, the SEC has not taken any action
on this proposal. Accordingly, FINRA
believes that its proposal does not
interfere with any recent SEC
rulemaking in this area. The DOL
proposals and interim final rule focus
on disclosures required in connection
with the sale of shares of mutual funds
to retirement plans and their
participants, rather than conflicts that
can arise generally when firms sell
shares of mutual funds. FINRA believes
that the cash compensation provisions
of proposed Rule 2341 will complement
information that the DOL requires
broker-dealers to disclose to plan
sponsors and participants. Moreover,
the DOL proposal would not cover sales
of shares of mutual funds outside of
employee pension benefit plans.
Section 919 of the Dodd-Frank Act
clarifies the SEC’s authority to issue
rules that require broker-dealers to
provide information to retail investors
before purchasing an investment
product or service from the brokerdealer.21 Notwithstanding this
provision, FINRA believes that it should
proceed with its proposal. Section 919
is not specific to mutual funds, nor does
it require the SEC to adopt rules similar
to the cash compensation provisions of
proposed FINRA Rule 2341. Moreover,
FINRA believes its proposal is
consistent with the goals of the DoddFrank Act to provide greater information
concerning potential conflicts of interest
to investors.
Proposed Disclosure Is Misleading to
Investors
Schwab, GWFS and SIFMA
commented that the cash compensation
disclosure required by the Notice
proposal would be misleading to
investors. Under the Notice proposal,
members would have had to disclose to
investors, if applicable, that the firm
receives cash payments from an offeror
other than sales charges or service fees
disclosed in the prospectus, the nature
of any such cash payments received in
the past 12 months, and the name of
each offeror that made such payments
listed in descending order based on the
amount of compensation received from
the offeror. These commenters noted
that the dollar amounts received by a
member would not provide meaningful
information to investors absent further
21 See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111–203,
§ 919 (2010).
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
explanation, and that such amounts
might not indicate that a cash
compensation arrangement with one
offeror would present greater conflicts
than arrangements with other offerors.
Given these concerns, as described in
this proposed rule change, FINRA has
revised the Notice proposal to require
what it believes is more meaningful
disclosure. As revised, the proposed
rule change would require a member to
make certain disclosures to new
customers in paper or electronic form
prior to the time that the customer first
purchases shares of an investment
company through the member if, within
the previous calendar year, it had
received or entered into an arrangement
to receive cash compensation from any
offeror, in addition to sales charges and
service fees disclosed in the
prospectuses of the funds it sold. The
proposed rule change would require
that, for existing customers, the member
provide these disclosures in paper or
electronic form to each such customer
by the later of either: (a) 90 days after
the effective date of the proposed rule
change, or (b) prior to the time the
customer first purchases shares of an
investment company through the
member after the effective date of the
proposed rule change (other than
purchases through reinvestment of
dividends or capital distributions or
through automatic investment plans).
The member would have to:
Prominently disclose that it receives (or
has entered into an arrangement to
receive) cash compensation in addition
to sales charges and service fees
disclosed in the prospectus;
prominently disclose that this
additional cash compensation may
influence the selection of funds that the
member and its associated persons offer
or recommend; and provide a prominent
reference to a web page or toll-free
number that provides more information
concerning these arrangements. The
web page or toll-free number would
have to provide a narrative description
of the cash compensation the member
receives (or will receive), in addition to
sales charges and service fees described
in the prospectus, and provide the
names of offerors that have paid (or will
pay) this additional cash compensation.
The web page or toll-free number also
would have to describe any services
provided or to be provided by the
member to the offeror or its affiliates for
this additional cash compensation. If
the member adopts a preferred list of
funds to be recommended to customers
as a result of the receipt of additional
cash compensation, this fact and the
names of the funds on the list also
would have to be provided.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
FINRA believes that, by providing
shortened disclosure at the times
specified in the proposed rule, members
would alert customers to these potential
conflicts of interest prior to the time that
they decide whether to buy investment
company securities through the
member. In addition, customers would
have the ability to learn more detail
about these cash compensation
arrangements if they choose through the
provided web page or toll-free number.
The narrative disclosure provided on a
member’s web page or toll-free
telephone number would disclose these
potential conflicts in a more
comprehensive and understandable
manner. This disclosure would go
beyond that proposed in the Notice
proposal in that it would require
members to disclose any arrangements
to receive cash compensation in
addition to the actual receipt of such
compensation. FINRA believes that
members subject to the rule’s cash
compensation disclosure requirements
should provide the specified disclosures
regarding such arrangements
irrespective of whether they have
received payment under the
arrangement at the time of disclosure.
FINRA has eliminated the requirement
proposed in the Notice proposal to
disclose the names of offerors in
descending order based on the amount
of cash compensation received.
GWFS commented that this disclosure
only focuses on payments related to
sales of shares of mutual funds, while
ignoring conflicts that can arise in
connection with the sale of other
products, such as collective investment
funds or other investments. LPL
similarly expressed concern that the
proposal discriminates against one
product, mutual funds, since it does not
require disclosure of cash compensation
paid in connection with the sale of other
products.
These comments are outside the scope
of the proposed rule change. Proposed
FINRA Rule 2341 and current NASD
Rule 2830 by their terms only apply to
the sale of investment company
securities. To the extent FINRA should
require similar disclosure in connection
with the sale of other securities, such
requirements would have to be included
in rules governing the sale of these
products.22
Opposition to Prospectus Level
Disclosure
The Notice proposal would have
prohibited members from receiving
22 See also Regulatory Notice 10–54 (Disclosure of
Services, Conflicts and Duties), discussed supra at
note 6.
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26783
sales charges and service fees from an
offeror unless such compensation is
described in the current prospectus for
the offeror’s investment company. The
Notice proposal also would have
prohibited members from entering into
‘‘special sales charges or service fee
arrangements’’ that are not made
available on the same terms to all
members that distribute the investment
company securities of the offeror, unless
the name of the member and the details
of the arrangement are disclosed in the
prospectus. The Notice proposal defined
‘‘special sales charge or service fee
arrangement’’ as ‘‘an arrangement under
which a member receives greater sales
charges or service fees than other
members selling the same investment
company securities.’’ The Notice
proposal then gave examples of such
arrangements. The proposed prospectus
disclosure was in addition to
requirements for members to disclose
details about cash compensation
arrangements when an account is
opened.23
A number of commenters objected to
the Notice proposal’s prospectus
disclosure requirements. Commenters
argued that members will not know if
the prospectus disclosure is accurate,
since they will not be parties to
arrangements between a fund complex
and other broker-dealers.24 ICI noted
that investment companies should not
be required to make these disclosures,
since the information necessary for an
investor to make an informed decision
about a member’s conflicts of interest
resides with the member, not the
investment company. Commenters also
argued that requiring disclosure in a
prospectus in addition to requiring a
member to provide separate disclosure
when an account is opened is
fragmented and confusing to
investors.25 In addition, commenters
argued that the SEC, rather than FINRA,
should determine what information
must be provided in an investment
company prospectus.26
Based on these concerns, FINRA has
determined to eliminate the prohibition
on receiving cash compensation unless
details regarding the arrangement are
disclosed in the offeror’s investment
company prospectuses. As revised in
this proposed rule change, the cash
compensation disclosures would have
to be delivered prior to the time a new
customer first purchases investment
23 See Regulatory Notice 09–34 (June 2009)
(Investment Company Securities).
24 See comment letters from FSI, GWFS, LPL and
SIFMA.
25 See comment letters from SIFMA and USAA.
26 See comment letters from LPL and SIFMA.
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
26784
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
company securities through the
member. The proposed rule change’s
provisions provide separate
requirements for delivery of these
disclosures to existing customers.
Burden on Members
Schwab and USAA argued that the
cash compensation proposal should not
be adopted because the burdens that the
proposal imposes on members are not
justified given the benefits to investors.
FINRA disagrees. With respect to selfregulatory organization rulemaking, the
appropriate standard, as stated in the
Act, is that the rules do not impose any
burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Moreover, FINRA
tailors its proposed rule changes as
narrowly as possible to achieve the
intended and necessary regulatory
benefit. As stated in Item 4 of the
proposed rule change, FINRA does not
believe that the proposed rule change
will result in any burden on
competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. While FINRA
recognizes that the proposed rule
change may impose some additional
burdens on members, FINRA continues
to believe that such burdens are
necessitated by the benefits to investors
in receiving greater transparency as to
the potential conflicts of interest that
can arise from arrangements related to
the sale and distribution of investment
company securities.
FSI and SIFMA objected to the Notice
proposal’s requirement to update
information contained on a member’s
web site or toll-free number on a semiannual basis, arguing that it would be
unnecessarily costly and provide little
benefit over annual updating. FINRA
believes it is important for customers to
receive current, accurate disclosures
about potential conflicts of interest
related to the receipt of additional cash
compensation. Accordingly, while
FINRA has modified the proposed rule
to require annual updating, it also
believes that this information should be
updated promptly if it becomes
materially inaccurate. Thus, as
modified, a member would be required
to update the disclosures describing
additional cash compensation
arrangements annually within 90 days
after the calendar year end. If this
information becomes materially
inaccurate between annual updates, it
would have to be updated promptly.27
27 FINRA
notes that this revised updating
requirement closely tracks the SEC’s standards for
updating the written disclosure statement that
investment advisers must provide to clients. See
Form ADV: General Instructions, Question #4.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
Schwab argued the requirement to
determine whether a member has
received cash compensation other than
the sales charges or service fees
disclosed in the prospectus is
burdensome, particularly if a member
operates a mutual fund ‘‘supermarket’’
where payments may come from a
combination of Rule 12b-1 fees, subadministrative fees and advisory fees.
FINRA disagrees. The sales charge and
service fees amounts that are paid to
members must be clearly disclosed in an
investment company prospectus. If a
member is or will be receiving cash
compensation beyond the amounts
disclosed in the prospectus fee table, the
member must disclose information
about these additional payments. FINRA
believes that information concerning the
pecuniary inducements that may create
incentives for broker-dealers to offer or
recommend particular investment
company securities should be available
to investors when making an investment
decision and that the importance of this
transparency cannot be offset by the
number of different investment
company securities that a member may
choose to offer. If a member is uncertain
as to the character of the payments it is
or will be receiving, it should err on the
side of disclosing the receipt or
expected receipt of these payments.
Requests for Clarification
The Notice proposal would have
required members to disclose the details
of any ‘‘special sales charge or service
fee arrangement’’ that was not made
available on the same terms to all
members that distribute an offeror’s
investment company securities.
Schwab, LPL and SIFMA commented
that ‘‘special sales charge or service fee
arrangement,’’ as defined in the Notice
proposal, was unclear and confusing.
The proposed rule change no longer
uses this term and has eliminated its
definition.
The Notice proposal would have
required members that receive any form
of cash compensation other than sales
charges or service fees disclosed in the
prospectus to disclose, among other
things, that the member receives ‘‘cash
payments’’ from an offeror other than
such sales charges or service fees. FSI
and SIFMA commented that the term
‘‘cash payments’’ is unclear, since it is
not defined in the proposal. FINRA has
revised this provision to use the defined
term ‘‘cash compensation’’ in lieu of
‘‘cash payments.’’
In addition, the proposed rule change
includes supplementary information
that provides guidance with respect to
the definition of ‘‘cash compensation.’’
The guidance explains that ‘‘cash
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
compensation’’ includes cash payments
commonly known as ‘‘revenue sharing’’
which are typically paid by the
investment company’s adviser or
another affiliate in connection with the
distribution of investment company
securities. The guidance notes that ‘‘cash
compensation’’ includes these payments
‘‘whether they are based upon the
amount of investment company assets
that a member’s customers hold, the
amount of investment company
securities that the member has sold, or
any amount if the payment is related to
the sale and distribution of the
investment company’s securities.’’ 28
The Notice stated that revenue
sharing payments can take many forms,
including an offeror’s helping to pay the
costs of a firm’s annual sales meeting.29
FSI, LPL and SIFMA all observed that
NASD Rule 2830(l)(5)(E) (and proposed
FINRA Rule 2341(l)(5)(E)) permit an
offeror to contribute money toward a
non-cash compensation arrangement
between a member and its associated
persons, provided that the arrangement
meets the criteria in NASD Rule
2830(l)(5)(D) (and proposed FINRA Rule
2341(l)(5)(D)). This provision thus
allows an offeror to contribute toward a
member’s annual sales meeting,
provided the sales meeting is a
permissible non-cash compensation
arrangement, without having to disclose
this contribution. These commenters
argued that such contributions should
not be treated as revenue sharing, given
that the industry does not consider such
payments to be revenue sharing. SIFMA
also commented that the description of
‘‘revenue sharing’’ in the Notice conflicts
with an SEC definition of the term,
citing an SEC enforcement order.30
The fact that the Rule, both currently
and as proposed, permits an offeror to
contribute money toward a member’s
annual sales meeting (assuming the
meeting complies with the requirements
for an internal non-cash compensation
arrangement) does not preclude the
need for a member to disclose these
payments as cash compensation. FINRA
believes that such payments raise the
same conflict-of-interest issues as other
forms of revenue sharing, and thus
should be disclosed.
FINRA also disagrees with SIFMA’s
assertion that its description of revenue
sharing is inconsistent with the SEC’s
past definitions of that term. As far as
FINRA is aware, the SEC has never
defined the term ‘‘revenue sharing’’ in a
28 See
proposed FINRA Rule 2341.01.
Regulatory Notice 09–34, at note 8.
30 See In the Matter of OppenheimerFunds, Inc.
and OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc., Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 52420, 2005 SEC LEXIS
2350 (Sept. 14, 2005).
29 See
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
rule or proposed rule text. The
definition cited by SIFMA is used solely
in the context of a settled enforcement
action between the SEC and a mutual
fund investment adviser and its
affiliated broker-dealer distributor and,
as such, should be considered exclusive
to the facts and circumstances discussed
in that action. In fact, the SEC has stated
separately in the context of its mutual
fund point-of-sale disclosure proposal
that revenue sharing ‘‘may encompass
multiple revenue streams’’ that ‘‘not only
pose potential conflicts of interest, but
also may have the indirect effect of
reducing investors’ returns by
increasing the distribution-related costs
incurred by funds.’’ 31 Accordingly,
FINRA believes that it is appropriate to
require members to disclose receipt of
such payments.
As discussed above, the proposed rule
change requires the cash compensation
disclosures to be delivered prior to the
time a new customer first purchases
shares of an investment company
through the member. The proposed rule
change’s provisions provide separate
requirements for delivery of these
disclosures to existing customers. GWFS
expressed uncertainty as to whom
FINRA considers to be a ‘‘customer,’’
particularly where the member sells
investment company securities to a
retirement plan. FINRA intends that
these disclosures be made to the person
with whom the member has a customer
relationship. If a member sells
investment company securities to a
retirement plan, the disclosure should
be made to the retirement plan sponsor.
The Notice proposal would have
required disclosure if a member had
received additional cash compensation
‘‘within the previous 12 months.’’ GWFS
and LPL expressed uncertainty as to
how this 12-month period would be
calculated (e.g., whether it would be a
rolling period or based on the calendar
year). FINRA has clarified the proposed
rule change to require disclosure based
on receiving or entering into an
arrangement to receive additional cash
compensation within the previous
calendar year.
ICI and SIFMA inquired whether the
cash compensation provisions would
require disclosure of the receipt of
payments for services, such as subadministrative or sub-transfer agency
fees. The term ‘‘cash compensation’’ is
31 See Securities Act Release No. 8358 (January
24, 2004), 69 FR 6438 (February 10, 2004)
(Confirmation Requirements and Point of Sale
Disclosure Requirements for Transactions in Certain
Mutual Funds and Other Securities, and Other
Confirmation Requirement Amendments, and
Amendments to the Registration Form for Mutual
Funds), at notes 17 & 21.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
defined broadly to mean ‘‘any discount,
concession, fee, service fee,
commission, asset-based sales charge,
loan, override or cash employee benefit
received in connection with the sale and
distribution of investment company
securities.’’ If a member is receiving fees
from an offeror for services, such as subadministrative or sub-transfer agency
fees, in connection with the sale and
distribution of investment company
securities, then proposed FINRA Rule
2341(l)(4)(A) would require the member
to disclose the receipt of these fees,
since they fall within the definition of
‘‘cash compensation.’’ In addition,
proposed FINRA Rule 2341(l)(4)(C)
would require the member to describe
this additional cash compensation and
the services provided or to be provided
by the member for this additional cash
compensation.
The Notice proposal would have
required a member to disclose ‘‘the
nature of any such cash payments
received in the past 12 months.’’ ICI
commented that it is not clear what ‘‘the
nature of any such payments’’ means.
Schwab and SIFMA recommended that
the proposal instead require firms to
describe the nature of services they
provide to offerors, and the nature of the
compensation received.
Based in part on these comments,
FINRA revised the cash compensation
disclosure provision in several respects.
As described above, as proposed, the
rule change would require a member
that receives, or has entered into an
arrangement to receive, cash
compensation in addition to sales
charges or service fees described in the
prospectus within the previous calendar
year, to disclose in paper or electronic
form to a new customer prior to the time
that the customer first purchases shares
of an investment company through the
member the fact that it receives (or will
receive) such compensation. The
member would also have to disclose
that this additional cash compensation
may influence the selection of
investment company securities that the
member and its associated persons offer
or recommend to investors. Further, the
member would have to provide a
reference to a web page or toll-free
telephone number through which a
customer could obtain more information
concerning the member’s cash
compensation arrangements. The
proposed rule change would require
that, for existing customers, the member
provide these disclosures in paper or
electronic form to each such customer
by the later of either: (a) 90 days after
the effective date of the proposed rule
change, or (b) prior to the time the
customer first purchases shares of an
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26785
investment company through the
member after the effective date of the
proposed rule change (other than
purchases through reinvestment of
dividends or capital distributions or
through automatic investment plans).
The web page or toll-free number
must provide a narrative description of
the additional cash compensation
received from offerors and any services
provided by the member to the offeror
or affiliates for this additional
compensation. Members will be allowed
to use narrative disclosure to explain
these arrangements. FINRA believes
these revisions will make this provision
clearer to members and will provide
more meaningful disclosure to investors
than that proposed in the Notice.
SIFMA inquired how the cash
compensation disclosure requirements
would apply in the situation in which
an introducing broker-dealer and
clearing firm share fees paid by an
offeror. Assuming the introducing firm
sold investment company securities to a
customer, the introducing firm would be
responsible for disclosing any
additional cash compensation it
receives from an offeror, even if it shares
such additional compensation with a
clearing firm. In such a situation, the
clearing firm would not be required to
make the disclosures under proposed
FINRA Rule 2341 to the customer.
SIFMA and FSI also inquired as to the
effect of the proposed disclosures on
guidance that FINRA previously
provided in Notice to Members 99–55,
Question #15. In that guidance, FINRA
addressed a situation in which an
offeror reimburses a registered
representative’s prospecting trip
expenses, such as travel, lodging and
meals related to meetings with
customers, stating that the
reimbursement payment would have to
be made through the member and
disclosed as cash compensation in
accordance with NASD Rule 2830(l)(4).
Under the proposed rule change, FINRA
would consider such payments from an
offeror to be additional cash
compensation that must be disclosed in
accordance with proposed FINRA Rule
2341(l)(4).
Internet Disclosure
In the Notice, FINRA requested
comment on how the required
information should be disclosed to
investors, particularly given the
availability of the Internet. In particular,
FINRA asked whether members should
be permitted to deliver initial disclosure
information to customers electronically,
unless a customer specifically requested
paper-based disclosure. Alternatively,
FINRA asked whether the rule should
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
26786
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
allow firms to provide generalized
disclosure to investors when an account
is opened regarding the receipt of cash
compensation that refers the investor to
a Web site address or toll-free telephone
number that provides more information.
FSI, GWFS, ICI, LPL and SIFMA all
supported revising the proposal to allow
web-based disclosure, unless a customer
specifically requests paper-based
disclosure. FINRA has revised the
proposal to allow members to utilize the
Internet or a toll-free number to provide
more detailed information concerning
cash compensation arrangements to
investors. FINRA has also specified that
if a customer specifically requests
paper-based disclosure, the member
must deliver this information to the
customer in paper form promptly.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Compliance Date
Schwab commented that, if the
proposal is adopted, FINRA should give
members at least 180 days following
adoption to comply with its
requirements. FSI and LPL argued for at
least 24 months’ lead time before
requiring firms to comply with the
proposal. As stated in Item 2 of the
proposed rule change, FINRA will
announce the implementation date of
the proposed rule change in a
Regulatory Notice to be published no
later than 90 days following
Commission approval. The
implementation date will be no later
than 365 days following Commission
approval. In establishing the effective
date, FINRA will take into account that
firms would need to modify their
compliance systems in light of the new
required disclosures.
Other Compensation Disclosure
Comments
The Notice proposal would have
required a member to disclose the
names of each offeror that paid
additional cash compensation, listed in
descending order based on the amount
of compensation received from each
offeror. FSI recommended that the
proposal be revised to permit listing
offerors in alphabetical order instead.
FINRA has revised this provision to
eliminate the requirement to list offerors
in descending order based on amounts
of cash compensation received. As
revised, the proposed rule change does
not require that offerors be listed in a
particular order, as long as the
disclosure requirements are met.
ICI recommended that the cash
compensation provisions have a de
minimis threshold below which
disclosure of cash compensation
payments would not be required. ICI
suggested that, if cash compensation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
payments from a single fund complex
represent 1% or less of the aggregate
cash compensation received by a
member, no disclosure should be
required. FINRA does not believe a de
minimis disclosure threshold is
appropriate. Whether particular cash
compensation payments create potential
conflicts of interest will depend on the
surrounding facts and circumstances,
and investors should be provided with
the opportunity to evaluate the nature of
any such conflicts. Accordingly, FINRA
believes the rule should require
members to disclose any amount of
additional cash compensation received
from an offeror.
The Notice proposal included a
paragraph (l)(4)(E) that provided that the
disclosure requirements of paragraph
(l)(4)(B) of the Notice proposal would
not apply to cash compensation in the
form of sales charges and service fees
disclosed in a fund’s prospectus fee
table.32 ICI recommended that this
paragraph be deleted as redundant given
that language in paragraph (l)(4)(B)
already excluded this compensation
from the disclosure requirements.
FINRA agrees and has deleted this
paragraph in the proposed rule change.
USAA argued that the cash
compensation provisions should
exclude members that do not pay their
registered representatives direct
commissions. FINRA disagrees, since
cash compensation arrangements can
create potential conflicts of interest even
in the absence of a commission-based
compensation system for registered
representatives. For example, a member
may select investment companies to be
included on its preferred list based in
part on cash compensation received
from offerors.
Warner Norcross recommended that
the cash compensation provisions be
revised to require disclosure at the point
of sale of any cash compensation not
disclosed in the prospectus. It also
recommended that the rule prohibit
recommended sales based on payouts
and require members to put the interests
of customers first. FINRA believes that
the proposed rule’s disclosure
requirements strike a rational balance
between providing access to customers
of important compensation information
that may in part underlie a brokerdealer’s decision to offer investment
company securities and the efficient
delivery of services to customers.
FINRA will continue to assess the best
mode of all disclosure to customers
including assessing whether
32 The disclosure requirements of paragraph
(l)(4)(B) of the Notice proposal would now be set
forth, as revised, in paragraph (l)(4)(A).
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
information access or point of sale
disclosure requirements result in greater
utilization of disclosure information.
With respect to firms’ obligations
regarding recommendations to
customers, FINRA notes that the SEC
recently approved new FINRA Rule
2111 (Suitability), which sets forth the
basis for determining the suitability of a
recommended transaction or investment
strategy involving a security or
securities.33
Non-Cash Compensation Provisions
NASD Rule 2830(l)(3) requires
members to keep records of all
compensation received by a member or
its associated persons from offerors,
except for gifts and entertainment
permitted by paragraphs (l)(5)(A) and
(l)(5)(B). The records must include the
names of the offerors, the names of the
associated persons, the amount of cash,
and the nature and, if known, the value
of non-cash compensation received. The
Notice proposed to eliminate the ‘‘if
known’’ qualification for the value of
non-cash compensation received.
Schwab, FSI and SIFMA all urged
FINRA to add language to the non-cash
compensation provisions to expressly
permit members to estimate the value of
goods and services received for which a
receipt or other documentation of value
is unavailable. FINRA has added
supplementary material to the rule
which would expressly permit a
member to estimate in good faith the
value of non-cash compensation
received when a receipt or other
documentation of value is unavailable.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period (i)
as the Commission may designate up to
90 days of such date if it finds such
longer period to be appropriate and
publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii) as to which the self-regulatory
33 See Regulatory Notice 11–02 (January 2011)
(SEC Approves Consolidated FINRA Rules
Governing Know-Your-Customer and Suitability
Obligations). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 63325 (November 17, 2010), 75 FR
71479 (November 23, 2010) (File No. SR–FINRA–
2010–039; Order Granting Accelerated Approval,
As Modified by Amendment, to Proposed Rule
Change to Adopt FINRA Rules 2090 (Know Your
Customer) and 2111 (Suitability) in the
Consolidated FINRA Rulebook); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 64260 (April 8, 2011), 76
FR 20759 (April 13, 2011) (File No. SR–FINRA–
2011–016; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Delay the
Implementation Date of FINRA Rule 2090 (Know
Your Customer) and FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability)).
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Notices
organization consents, the Commission
will:
(A) By order approve or disapprove
such proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
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–FINRA–2011–018 on the
subject line.
should be submitted on or before May
31, 2011.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.34
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011–11190 Filed 5–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–64383; File No. 4–627]
Short Sale Reporting Study Required
by Dodd-Frank Act Section 417(a)(2)
Securities and Exchange
Commission.
ACTION: Request for comment.
AGENCY:
The Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), on behalf
of its Division of Risk, Strategy, and
Paper Comments
Financial Innovation (‘‘Division’’), is
requesting public comment with regard
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to studies required by the Dodd-Frank
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Securities and Exchange Commission,
Protection Act of the feasibility,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
benefits, and costs of requiring reporting
20549–1090.
in real time, either publicly or, in the
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–FINRA–2011–018. This file alternative, only to the Commission and
the Financial Industry Regulatory
number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Authority (‘‘FINRA’’), of short sale
positions of publicly listed securities,
Commission process and review your
and of conducting a voluntary pilot
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will program in which public companies
post all comments on the Commission’s would agree to have all trades of their
shares marked ‘‘long,’’ ‘‘short,’’ ‘‘market
Internet website (https://www.sec.gov/
maker short,’’ ‘‘buy,’’ or ‘‘buy-to-cover,’’
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
and reported as such in real time
submission, all subsequent
through the Consolidated Tape.
amendments, all written statements
DATES: Comments should be received on
with respect to the proposed rule
or before June 23, 2011.
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
communications relating to the
submitted by any of the following
proposed rule change between the
methods:
Commission and any person, other than
Electronic Comments
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
• Use the Commission’s Internet
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
available for website viewing and
rules/other.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to ruleprinting in the Commission’s Public
comments@sec.gov. Please include File
Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Number 4–627 on the subject line.
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10
Paper Comments
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing
• Send paper comments in triplicate
also will be available for inspection and
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, U.S.
copying at the principal office of
Securities and Exchange Commission,
FINRA. All comments received will be
posted without change; the Commission 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You
All submissions should refer to File
should submit only information that
Number 4–627. To help us process and
you wish to make publicly available. All review your comments more efficiently,
submissions should refer to File
34 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
Number SR–FINRA–2011–018 and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 May 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26787
please use only one method. The
Commission will post all comments on
the Commission’s Internet Web site
(https://www.sec.gov). Comments will
also be available for Web site viewing
and printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. All comments received
will be posted without change; we do
not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Edwards, Assistant Director, Bruce
Kraus, Co-Chief Counsel, Lillian Hagen,
Special Counsel, Sandra Mortal,
Financial Economist, Division of Risk,
Strategy, and Financial Innovation, at
(202) 551–6655, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549–4977.
Discussion:
Under Section 417(a)(2) of the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act),1
the Commission’s Division of Risk,
Strategy, and Financial Innovation is
required to conduct studies of the
feasibility, benefits, and costs of (A)
requiring reporting in real time, publicly
or, in the alternative, only to the
Commission and the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, short sale
positions in publicly listed securities,
and (B) conducting a voluntary pilot
program in which public companies
could agree to have sales of their shares
marked ‘‘long,’’ ‘‘short,’’ or ‘‘market
maker short,’’ and purchases of their
shares marked ‘‘buy’’ or ‘‘buy-to-cover,’’
and reported as such in real time
through the Consolidated Tape.2
In the Division’s estimation, data
made public by certain self-regulatory
organizations (‘‘SROs’’) indicate that
orders marked ‘‘short’’ under current
regulations account for nearly 50% of
listed equity share volume.3 Short
1 Public
Law 111–203 (July 21, 2010).
term ‘‘Consolidated Tape,’’ as used
throughout this release, refers to the current
reporting systems for transactions in all exchangelisted stocks and ETFs. These systems include
Tapes A and B of the Consolidated Tape Plan and
Tape C of the Unlisted Trading Privileges or ‘‘UTP’’
Plan. Trades in New York Stock Exchange
(‘‘NYSE’’)-listed securities are reported to Tape A;
trades in NYSE–Amex, NYSE–Arca, and regional
exchange-listed securities are reported to Tape B;
and trades in NASDAQ-listed securities are
reported to Tape C. Transactions in unlisted
equities, options, or non-equity securities are not
currently reported to the Consolidated Tape. For
more information see https://www.nyxdata.com/cta
and https://www.utpplan.com/.
3 This estimate was made by the Division based
on short selling volume data for June 2010 made
2 The
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
Continued
09MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 89 (Monday, May 9, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26779-26787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11190]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-64386; File No. SR-FINRA-2011-018]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment
No. 1 to Adopt NASD Rule 2830 as FINRA Rule 2341 (Investment Company
Securities) in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook
May 3, 2011.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 19, 2011, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. On May 3, 2011,
FINRA filed Amendment No. 1. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
FINRA is proposing to adopt NASD Rule 2830 (Investment Company
Securities) as FINRA Rule 2341 (Investment Company Securities) in the
consolidated FINRA rulebook with significant changes. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web site at https://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA and at the Commission's
Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, FINRA included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. FINRA 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
As part of the process of developing a new consolidated rulebook
(``Consolidated FINRA Rulebook''),\3\ FINRA is proposing to adopt NASD
Rule 2830 (Investment Company Securities) as FINRA Rule 2341
(Investment Company Securities) in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook with
significant changes, as discussed below. NASD Rule 2830 regulates
members' activities in connection with the sale and distribution of
securities of companies registered under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (``investment company securities'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The current FINRA rulebook consists of (1) FINRA Rules; (2)
NASD Rules; and (3) rules incorporated from NYSE (``Incorporated
NYSE Rules'') (together, the NASD Rules and Incorporated NYSE Rules
are referred to as the ``Transitional Rulebook''). While the NASD
Rules generally apply to all FINRA members, the Incorporated NYSE
Rules apply only to those members of FINRA that are also members of
the NYSE (``Dual Members''). The FINRA Rules apply to all FINRA
members, unless such rules have a more limited application by their
terms. For more information about the rulebook consolidation
process, see Information Notice, March 12, 2008 (Rulebook
Consolidation Process).
\4\ As with NASD Rule 2830, FINRA Rule 2341 would not regulate
members' activities in connection with variable insurance contracts,
which are regulated by FINRA Rule 2320 (Variable Contracts of an
Insurance Company).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASD Rule 2830
In connection with the distribution and sale of investment company
securities, NASD Rule 2830 limits the sales charges members may
receive, prohibits directed brokerage arrangements, limits the payment
and receipt of cash and non-cash compensation, sets conditions on
discounts to dealers, and addresses other issues such as members'
purchases and sales of investment company securities as principal.
Proposed FINRA Rule 2341 would revise the provisions of NASD Rule
2830 in four areas. First, Rule 2341 would require a member to make new
disclosures to investors regarding its receipt of or its entering into
an arrangement to receive, cash compensation. Second, Rule 2341 would
make a minor change to the recordkeeping requirements for non-cash
compensation. Third, Rule 2341 would eliminate a condition regarding
discounted sales of investment company securities to dealers. Fourth,
Rule 2341 would codify past FINRA staff interpretations regarding the
purchases and sales of exchange-traded funds (``ETFs''). These proposed
changes are discussed in more detail below.
Proposed Changes to the Cash Compensation Disclosure Requirements
NASD Rule 2830(l) governs the payment and acceptance of cash and
non-cash compensation in connection with the sale of investment company
securities. Among other things, NASD Rule 2830(l)(4) prohibits members
from accepting cash compensation from an ``offeror'' (generally an
investment company and its affiliates) unless the compensation is
described in the fund's current prospectus. If a member enters into a
``special cash compensation'' arrangement with an offeror, and the
offeror does not make the arrangement available on the same terms to
all members that sell the fund's shares, the member's name and the
details of the arrangement must be disclosed in the prospectus.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ FINRA staff has interpreted this provision as permitting
disclosure in a fund's statement of additional information
(``SAI''). See Notice to Members 99-55 (July 1999) (Questions and
Answers Relating to Non-Cash Compensation Rules), Question
18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule change would modify the disclosure requirements
for cash compensation arrangements. As proposed, it would no longer
require disclosure of cash compensation arrangements in an investment
company's prospectus or SAI. Instead, if within the previous calendar
year a member received, or entered into an arrangement to receive, from
an offeror any cash compensation other than sales charges and service
fees disclosed in the prospectus fee tables of investment
[[Page 26780]]
companies sold by the member (``additional cash compensation''), the
member would have to make certain disclosures.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The terms ``sales charge'' and ``service fees'' are defined
in NASD Rule 2830 and would retain the same definitions in FINRA
Rule 2341. ``Sales charge'' means ``all charges or fees that are
paid to finance sales or sales promotion expenses, including front-
end, deferred and asset-based sales charges, excluding charges and
fees for ministerial, recordkeeping or administrative activities and
investment management fees.'' See NASD Rule 2830(b)(8). ``Service
fees'' mean ``payments by an investment company for personal service
and/or the maintenance of shareholder accounts.'' See NASD Rule
2830(b)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA believes that the proposed amendments to the rule would
strengthen the rule's requirements regarding cash compensation
disclosure and would further inform investors of the potential
conflicts that can arise from the sale of investment company securities
when a member receives cash compensation other than sales charges and
service fees disclosed in the prospectus fee tables of such investment
companies.\7\ While the current rule prohibits members from selling
investment company shares unless certain information regarding cash
compensation arrangements is disclosed either in an investment
company's prospectus or SAI, it does not impose any disclosure
requirements on the member itself. Requiring disclosure of these
arrangements, in the detail described below, by the member would enable
investors to better evaluate whether a member's particular product
recommendation was influenced by these arrangements, and would be an
important adjunct to existing suitability, sales practice and
disclosure requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ FINRA further notes that, in October 2010, it published a
Regulatory Notice requesting comment on a concept proposal to
require members, at or prior to commencing a business relationship
with a retail customer, to provide a written statement to the
customer describing the types of accounts and services it provides,
as well as conflicts associated with such services and any
limitations on the duties the member otherwise owes to retail
customers. See Regulatory Notice 10-54 (October 2010) (Disclosure of
Services, Conflicts and Duties). FINRA staff conceives that the
document would include, in the case of investment company
securities, the information required by proposed FINRA Rule 2341,
but also would include disclosures more broadly as to financial or
other incentives, conflicts and limitations on duties, as described
in Regulatory Notice 10-54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, the member would have to prominently disclose that it has
received, or has entered into an arrangement to receive, cash
compensation from investment companies and their affiliates, in
addition to the sales charges and service fees disclosed in the
prospectus fee table. In this context, ``cash compensation'' would
include fees received from an offeror in return for services provided
to the offeror, such as sub-administrative and sub-transfer agency
fees. Second, the member would have to prominently disclose that this
additional cash compensation may influence the selection of investment
company securities that the member and its associated persons offer or
recommend to investors. Third, the member would have to provide a
prominent reference (or in the case of electronically delivered
documents, a hyperlink) to a web page or toll-free telephone number
where the investor could obtain additional information concerning these
arrangements.
For new customers on or after the effective date of the proposed
rule change, the member would have to provide these disclosures in
paper or electronic form \8\ to each such customer prior to the time
that the customer first purchases shares of an investment company
through the member. For existing customers at the time the proposed
rule change becomes effective, the member would have to provide these
disclosures in paper or electronic form to each such customer by the
later of either: (a) 90 days after the effective date of the proposed
rule change, or (b) prior to the time the customer first purchases
shares of an investment company through the member after the effective
date (other than purchases through reinvestment of dividends or capital
distributions or through automatic investment plans).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Notice to Members 98-3 (January 1998) (Electronic
Delivery of Information Between Members and Their Customers). This
Notice to Members provides that members may electronically transmit
documents that they are required or permitted to furnish to
customers under FINRA rules provided that the members adhere to
standards contained in 1995 and 1996 SEC Releases. See Securities
Act Release No. 7233 (October 6, 1995), 60 FR 53458 (October 13,
1995); Securities Act Release No. 7288 (May 9, 1996), 61 FR 24644
(May 15, 1996). The Notice to Members urges members to review these
SEC Releases in their entirety to ensure compliance with all aspects
of the SEC's electronic delivery requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, if a member has received, or entered into an
arrangement to receive, additional cash compensation, the member would
have to establish a web page or toll-free telephone number through
which a customer could obtain additional information concerning the
member's cash compensation arrangements. The web page or toll-free
telephone number would have to provide:
A narrative description of the additional cash
compensation received from offerors, or to be received pursuant to an
arrangement entered into with an offeror, and any services provided, or
to be provided, by the member to the offeror or its affiliates for this
additional cash compensation;
If applicable, a narrative description of any preferred
list of investment companies to be recommended to customers that the
member has adopted as a result of the receipt of additional cash
compensation, including the names of the investment companies on this
list; and
The names of the offerors that have paid, or entered into
an arrangement with the member to pay, this additional cash
compensation to the member.
The member would be required to update this information annually
within 90 days after the calendar year end. If this information becomes
materially inaccurate between annual updates, the member would have to
update it promptly. Also, if a customer specifically requests paper-
based disclosure of the information provided through a web page or
toll-free telephone number, the member would have to deliver this
information to the customer in paper form promptly.
The proposal also would add supplementary material that would
clarify the definition of ``cash compensation,'' which would supersede
all prior guidance with respect to this definition.\9\ The
supplementary material would provide that ``cash compensation''
includes, among other things, revenue sharing paid in connection with
the sale and distribution of investment company securities.\10\ The
supplementary material would specify that ``cash compensation''
includes revenue sharing payments regardless of whether they are based
upon the amount of investment
[[Page 26781]]
company assets that a member's customers hold, the amount of investment
company securities that the member has sold, or any other amount if the
payment is related to the sale and distribution of the investment
company's securities. As cash compensation, members would be required
to disclose such revenue sharing arrangements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 37374 (June
26, 1996), 61 FR 35822 (July 8, 1996) (File No. SR-NASD-95-61;
Proposed Rule Change by NASD Relating to the Regulation of Cash and
Non-Cash Compensation In Connection With the Sale of Investment
Company Securities and Variable Contracts); Notice to Members 97-50
(August 1997) (NASD Regulation Requests Comment On Regulation Of
Payment And Receipt Of Cash Compensation Incentives) and Dep't. of
Enforcement v. Respondent, Decision No. E8A2003062001, June 28, 2007
(redacted decision) (noting administrative history of current rule).
\10\ Revenue sharing payments can take many different forms. For
example, an offeror may make a year-end payment to a broker-dealer
based on the amount the broker-dealer's customers currently hold in
the offeror's funds, or based on the broker-dealer's total sales of
the offeror's funds in the previous year. Additionally, revenue
sharing payments can take the form of other cash payments, such as a
payment by an offeror to help pay the costs of a broker-dealer's
annual sales meeting. See, e.g., Securities Act Release No. 8358
(January 24, 2004) [sic], 69 FR 6438 (February 10, 2004)
(Confirmation Requirements and Point of Sale Disclosure Requirements
for Transactions in Certain Mutual Funds and Other Securities, and
Other Confirmation Requirement Amendments, and Amendments to the
Registration Form for Mutual Funds) at note 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These disclosure requirements would apply only to members that
receive or enter into an arrangement to receive additional cash
compensation from an offeror. Thus, if a member sells a mutual fund's
shares and receives only the sales load and distribution or service
fees described in the fund's prospectus fee tables, and does not
receive or enter into an arrangement to receive revenue sharing or
other additional cash compensation from an offeror, the member would
not be required to make the disclosures specified in proposed FINRA
Rule 2341(l)(4). Likewise, a principal underwriter of a no-load mutual
fund that sells shares directly to investors, and does not receive or
enter into an arrangement to receive any cash compensation beyond what
is described in the fund's prospectus fee table, would not be subject
to the disclosure requirements of paragraph (l)(4).
Proposed Changes to the Non-Cash Compensation Provisions
NASD Rule 2830(l)(5) generally prohibits members and their
associated persons from accepting or making payments of non-cash
compensation in connection with the sale of investment company
securities, subject to certain exceptions. These exceptions allow gifts
of under $100, entertainment that does not raise questions of
propriety, certain training or education meetings, and sales contests
that do not favor particular products.
NASD Rule 2830(l)(3) requires members to keep records of all
compensation received by the member or its associated persons from
offerors, other than small gifts and entertainment permitted by the
rule. Currently, this provision requires the records to include the
nature of, and ``if known,'' the value of any non-cash compensation
received. FINRA proposes to modify this requirement by deleting the
phrase ``if known'' regarding the value of non-cash compensation. This
change would make the provision more consistent with the non-cash
compensation recordkeeping requirements in other FINRA rules.\11\ The
proposal also would add supplementary material that would clarify that,
if a member or associated person receives non-cash compensation from an
offeror for which a receipt or other documentation of value is
unavailable, the member may estimate in good faith the value of such
compensation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See recordkeeping requirements for non-cash compensation
accepted or paid in connection with the distribution or sale of
direct participation programs in FINRA Rule 2310(c)(2), variable
insurance contracts in FINRA Rule 2320(g)(3), and public offerings
of securities in FINRA Rule 5110(h)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Changes Regarding Conditions for Discounts to Dealers
NASD Rule 2830(c) currently prohibits investment company
underwriters from selling the fund's shares to a broker-dealer at a
price other than the public offering price unless they meet two
requirements:
The sale must be in conformance with NASD Rule 2420; and
for certain investment company securities, a sales
agreement must be in place that sets forth the concessions paid to the
broker-dealer.
The requirement that the sale be in conformance with NASD Rule 2420
is based on historical concerns that both underwriters and dealers of
investment company securities be FINRA members. Since the time this
provision was adopted, the laws governing broker-dealers have changed,
and today virtually all broker-dealers doing business with the public
are FINRA members. As a result of this change, the proposal would
eliminate the requirement that the sale be in conformance with NASD
Rule 2420.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ FINRA is proposing to replace NASD Rule 2420 with FINRA
Rule 2040. See Regulatory Notice 09-69 (December 2009) (Payments to
Unregistered Persons).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Changes Regarding Sales of Shares of ETFs
In recent years, members have bought and sold shares of ETFs, which
are open-end management investment companies or unit investment trusts
(``UITs'') that differ from traditional mutual funds and UITs, since
their shares typically are traded on securities exchanges. Because ETF
shares are sometimes traded at prices that differ from the fund's
current net asset value, ETFs can raise issues under both the
Investment Company Act and NASD Rule 2830. For example, Section 22(d)
of the Investment Company Act requires dealers to sell shares of an
open-end investment company at the current public offering price
described in the investment company's prospectus (i.e., the fund's net
asset value plus any applicable sales load). Similarly, NASD Rule
2830(i) generally prohibits members from purchasing fund shares at a
price lower than the bid price next quoted by or for the issuer (for
traditional mutual funds, this price is the fund's next quoted net
asset value).
To address these issues, the SEC has issued a series of exemptive
orders that allow ETFs to trade on exchanges at prices that differ from
the fund's public offering price. The SEC also has proposed a rule that
generally would codify the exemptive relief provided by its orders.\13\
Similarly, FINRA staff has issued letters interpreting NASD Rule 2830
that allow members to purchase and sell shares of ETFs at prices other
than the current net asset value consistent with SEC exemptive
orders.\14\ The proposal would add a new paragraph, FINRA Rule 2341(o),
to codify earlier FINRA staff interpretive letters that permit the
trading of ETF shares at prices other than the current net asset value
consistent with applicable SEC rules or exemptive orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Securities Act Release No. 8901; Investment Company Act
Release No. 28193 (March 11, 2008), 73 FR 14618 (March 18, 2008)
(Exchange-Traded Funds (``ETFs'')).
\14\ See, e.g., Letter from Joseph P. Savage, Counsel,
Investment Companies Regulation, NASD, to Kathleen H. Moriarty,
Esq., Carter, Ledyard & Milburn, dated October 30, 2002, available
at https://www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/Guidance/InterpretiveLetters/P002680.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Changes
Paragraph (b)(10) of NASD Rule 2830 incorporates by reference
several definitions under the Investment Company Act, including ``open-
end management investment company.'' The Investment Company Act does
not define the term ``open-end management investment company,'' but
does define ``management company,'' and divides this term into two sub-
classifications, ``open-end company'' and ``closed-end company.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Sections 4(3) and 5(a) of the Investment Company Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASD Rule 2830 employs the terms ``open-end investment company''
and ``open-end management investment company,'' as well as the term
``closed-end investment company.'' These terms are intended to have the
same meanings as ``open-end company'' and ``closed-end company,''
respectively, under the Investment Company Act. Accordingly, paragraph
(b)(10) of proposed FINRA Rule 2341 incorporates the definitions of
``open-end company'' and ``closed-end company'' from the Investment
Company Act, rather than ``open-end management investment company.''
Likewise, references to these terms within NASD Rule 2830 have been
revised in proposed FINRA Rule 2341 to
[[Page 26782]]
refer to ``open-end companies'' and ``closed-end companies.''
FINRA will announce the implementation date of the proposed rule
change no later than 90 days following Commission approval. The
implementation date will be no more than 365 days following Commission
approval.
2. Statutory Basis
FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\16\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change will help
ensure that investors are informed of potential conflicts of interest
that can arise from arrangements related to the sale and distribution
of investment company securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
In June 2009, FINRA published Regulatory Notice 09-34 (the
``Notice'') requesting comment on the rule as proposed therein (the
``Notice proposal''). A copy of the Notice is attached as Exhibit 2a.
The comment period expired on August 3, 2009. FINRA received nine
comments in response to the Notice. A list of the commenters in
response to the Notice is attached as Exhibit 2b, and copies of the
comment letters received in response to the Notice are attached as
Exhibit 2c.\17\ A summary of the comments and FINRA's response is
provided below. Since almost all of the comments that FINRA received on
the proposal concerned its provisions governing receipt of cash
compensation, these comments and FINRA's responses thereto are further
categorized by subject matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Exhibit 2b for a list of abbreviations assigned to
commenters. The Commission notes that these exhibits are part of the
filing which is available on FINRA's website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal is Premature and Duplicative
Several commenters argued that the proposal regarding cash
compensation is premature and duplicative given other legislative and
regulatory initiatives that deal with conflicts of interest that can
arise in the sale of shares of mutual funds. Schwab noted that the SEC
previously had proposed to require broker-dealers to disclose certain
conflicts of interest at the point of sale when offering investment
company securities.\18\ Schwab also cited legislation in Congress that,
among other things, would clarify the SEC's authority to promulgate
rules requiring that certain information be disclosed prior to the sale
of shares of a mutual fund.\19\ GWFS and Sutherland cited proposals by
the U.S. Department of Labor (``DOL'') under the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (``ERISA'') to require broker-
dealers and other service providers to make certain disclosures
regarding conflicts of interest to employee benefit pension plans, and
proposed regulations to require the disclosure of plan and investment-
related information to participants and beneficiaries in participant-
directed individual account plans, such as 401(k) plans.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Securities Act Release No. 8358 (January 29, 2004), 69
FR 6438 (February 10, 2004) (Confirmation Requirements and Point of
Sale Disclosure Requirements for Transactions in Certain Mutual
Funds and Other Securities, and Other Confirmation Requirement
Amendments, and Amendments to the Registration Form for Mutual
Funds), and Securities Act Release No. 8544 (February 28, 2005), 70
FR 10521 (March 4, 2005) (reopening the comment period on proposed
rules, published in January 2004, that would require broker-dealers
to provide their customers with information regarding the costs and
conflicts of interest that arise from the distribution of mutual
fund shares, 529 college savings plan interests, and variable
insurance products).
\19\ See Section 914 of the Investor Protection Act of 2009. See
U.S. Treasury press release of July 10, 2009, https://www.treas.gov/press/releases/tg189.htm. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act''), which was signed into
law in July 2010, included essentially the same provision cited by
Schwab. See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act, Public Law 111-203, Sec. 919 (2010).
\20\ See Reasonable Contract or Arrangement under Section
408(b)(2)--Fee Disclosure, 72 FR 70988 (December 13, 2007)
(subsequently codified at 29 C.F.R. pt 2550) (``Reasonable Contract
Proposal''), and Fiduciary Requirements for Disclosure in
Participant-Directed Individual Account Plans, 73 FR 43014 (July 23,
2008) (subsequently codified at 29 C.F.R. pt 2550). The DOL adopted
the Reasonable Contract Proposal as an interim final rule, with
request for comments, in July 2010. See Reasonable Contract or
Arrangement Under Section 408(b)(2)--Fee Disclosure, 75 FR 41600
(July 16, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While FINRA is aware of the SEC and the DOL proposals and interim
final rule that may address similar issues, FINRA does not believe that
the cash compensation provisions are either premature or duplicative of
these other rules and rule proposals. The SEC's point-of-sale proposal
was initially published for comment in 2004, and re-published for
comment in 2005; since then, the SEC has not taken any action on this
proposal. Accordingly, FINRA believes that its proposal does not
interfere with any recent SEC rulemaking in this area. The DOL
proposals and interim final rule focus on disclosures required in
connection with the sale of shares of mutual funds to retirement plans
and their participants, rather than conflicts that can arise generally
when firms sell shares of mutual funds. FINRA believes that the cash
compensation provisions of proposed Rule 2341 will complement
information that the DOL requires broker-dealers to disclose to plan
sponsors and participants. Moreover, the DOL proposal would not cover
sales of shares of mutual funds outside of employee pension benefit
plans.
Section 919 of the Dodd-Frank Act clarifies the SEC's authority to
issue rules that require broker-dealers to provide information to
retail investors before purchasing an investment product or service
from the broker-dealer.\21\ Notwithstanding this provision, FINRA
believes that it should proceed with its proposal. Section 919 is not
specific to mutual funds, nor does it require the SEC to adopt rules
similar to the cash compensation provisions of proposed FINRA Rule
2341. Moreover, FINRA believes its proposal is consistent with the
goals of the Dodd-Frank Act to provide greater information concerning
potential conflicts of interest to investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act, Public Law 111-203, Sec. 919 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Disclosure Is Misleading to Investors
Schwab, GWFS and SIFMA commented that the cash compensation
disclosure required by the Notice proposal would be misleading to
investors. Under the Notice proposal, members would have had to
disclose to investors, if applicable, that the firm receives cash
payments from an offeror other than sales charges or service fees
disclosed in the prospectus, the nature of any such cash payments
received in the past 12 months, and the name of each offeror that made
such payments listed in descending order based on the amount of
compensation received from the offeror. These commenters noted that the
dollar amounts received by a member would not provide meaningful
information to investors absent further
[[Page 26783]]
explanation, and that such amounts might not indicate that a cash
compensation arrangement with one offeror would present greater
conflicts than arrangements with other offerors.
Given these concerns, as described in this proposed rule change,
FINRA has revised the Notice proposal to require what it believes is
more meaningful disclosure. As revised, the proposed rule change would
require a member to make certain disclosures to new customers in paper
or electronic form prior to the time that the customer first purchases
shares of an investment company through the member if, within the
previous calendar year, it had received or entered into an arrangement
to receive cash compensation from any offeror, in addition to sales
charges and service fees disclosed in the prospectuses of the funds it
sold. The proposed rule change would require that, for existing
customers, the member provide these disclosures in paper or electronic
form to each such customer by the later of either: (a) 90 days after
the effective date of the proposed rule change, or (b) prior to the
time the customer first purchases shares of an investment company
through the member after the effective date of the proposed rule change
(other than purchases through reinvestment of dividends or capital
distributions or through automatic investment plans).
The member would have to: Prominently disclose that it receives (or
has entered into an arrangement to receive) cash compensation in
addition to sales charges and service fees disclosed in the prospectus;
prominently disclose that this additional cash compensation may
influence the selection of funds that the member and its associated
persons offer or recommend; and provide a prominent reference to a web
page or toll-free number that provides more information concerning
these arrangements. The web page or toll-free number would have to
provide a narrative description of the cash compensation the member
receives (or will receive), in addition to sales charges and service
fees described in the prospectus, and provide the names of offerors
that have paid (or will pay) this additional cash compensation. The web
page or toll-free number also would have to describe any services
provided or to be provided by the member to the offeror or its
affiliates for this additional cash compensation. If the member adopts
a preferred list of funds to be recommended to customers as a result of
the receipt of additional cash compensation, this fact and the names of
the funds on the list also would have to be provided.
FINRA believes that, by providing shortened disclosure at the times
specified in the proposed rule, members would alert customers to these
potential conflicts of interest prior to the time that they decide
whether to buy investment company securities through the member. In
addition, customers would have the ability to learn more detail about
these cash compensation arrangements if they choose through the
provided web page or toll-free number. The narrative disclosure
provided on a member's web page or toll-free telephone number would
disclose these potential conflicts in a more comprehensive and
understandable manner. This disclosure would go beyond that proposed in
the Notice proposal in that it would require members to disclose any
arrangements to receive cash compensation in addition to the actual
receipt of such compensation. FINRA believes that members subject to
the rule's cash compensation disclosure requirements should provide the
specified disclosures regarding such arrangements irrespective of
whether they have received payment under the arrangement at the time of
disclosure. FINRA has eliminated the requirement proposed in the Notice
proposal to disclose the names of offerors in descending order based on
the amount of cash compensation received.
GWFS commented that this disclosure only focuses on payments
related to sales of shares of mutual funds, while ignoring conflicts
that can arise in connection with the sale of other products, such as
collective investment funds or other investments. LPL similarly
expressed concern that the proposal discriminates against one product,
mutual funds, since it does not require disclosure of cash compensation
paid in connection with the sale of other products.
These comments are outside the scope of the proposed rule change.
Proposed FINRA Rule 2341 and current NASD Rule 2830 by their terms only
apply to the sale of investment company securities. To the extent FINRA
should require similar disclosure in connection with the sale of other
securities, such requirements would have to be included in rules
governing the sale of these products.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See also Regulatory Notice 10-54 (Disclosure of Services,
Conflicts and Duties), discussed supra at note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opposition to Prospectus Level Disclosure
The Notice proposal would have prohibited members from receiving
sales charges and service fees from an offeror unless such compensation
is described in the current prospectus for the offeror's investment
company. The Notice proposal also would have prohibited members from
entering into ``special sales charges or service fee arrangements''
that are not made available on the same terms to all members that
distribute the investment company securities of the offeror, unless the
name of the member and the details of the arrangement are disclosed in
the prospectus. The Notice proposal defined ``special sales charge or
service fee arrangement'' as ``an arrangement under which a member
receives greater sales charges or service fees than other members
selling the same investment company securities.'' The Notice proposal
then gave examples of such arrangements. The proposed prospectus
disclosure was in addition to requirements for members to disclose
details about cash compensation arrangements when an account is
opened.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Regulatory Notice 09-34 (June 2009) (Investment Company
Securities).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A number of commenters objected to the Notice proposal's prospectus
disclosure requirements. Commenters argued that members will not know
if the prospectus disclosure is accurate, since they will not be
parties to arrangements between a fund complex and other broker-
dealers.\24\ ICI noted that investment companies should not be required
to make these disclosures, since the information necessary for an
investor to make an informed decision about a member's conflicts of
interest resides with the member, not the investment company.
Commenters also argued that requiring disclosure in a prospectus in
addition to requiring a member to provide separate disclosure when an
account is opened is fragmented and confusing to investors.\25\ In
addition, commenters argued that the SEC, rather than FINRA, should
determine what information must be provided in an investment company
prospectus.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See comment letters from FSI, GWFS, LPL and SIFMA.
\25\ See comment letters from SIFMA and USAA.
\26\ See comment letters from LPL and SIFMA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on these concerns, FINRA has determined to eliminate the
prohibition on receiving cash compensation unless details regarding the
arrangement are disclosed in the offeror's investment company
prospectuses. As revised in this proposed rule change, the cash
compensation disclosures would have to be delivered prior to the time a
new customer first purchases investment
[[Page 26784]]
company securities through the member. The proposed rule change's
provisions provide separate requirements for delivery of these
disclosures to existing customers.
Burden on Members
Schwab and USAA argued that the cash compensation proposal should
not be adopted because the burdens that the proposal imposes on members
are not justified given the benefits to investors. FINRA disagrees.
With respect to self-regulatory organization rulemaking, the
appropriate standard, as stated in the Act, is that the rules do not
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Moreover, FINRA tailors its
proposed rule changes as narrowly as possible to achieve the intended
and necessary regulatory benefit. As stated in Item 4 of the proposed
rule change, FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. While FINRA
recognizes that the proposed rule change may impose some additional
burdens on members, FINRA continues to believe that such burdens are
necessitated by the benefits to investors in receiving greater
transparency as to the potential conflicts of interest that can arise
from arrangements related to the sale and distribution of investment
company securities.
FSI and SIFMA objected to the Notice proposal's requirement to
update information contained on a member's web site or toll-free number
on a semi-annual basis, arguing that it would be unnecessarily costly
and provide little benefit over annual updating. FINRA believes it is
important for customers to receive current, accurate disclosures about
potential conflicts of interest related to the receipt of additional
cash compensation. Accordingly, while FINRA has modified the proposed
rule to require annual updating, it also believes that this information
should be updated promptly if it becomes materially inaccurate. Thus,
as modified, a member would be required to update the disclosures
describing additional cash compensation arrangements annually within 90
days after the calendar year end. If this information becomes
materially inaccurate between annual updates, it would have to be
updated promptly.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ FINRA notes that this revised updating requirement closely
tracks the SEC's standards for updating the written disclosure
statement that investment advisers must provide to clients. See Form
ADV: General Instructions, Question 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schwab argued the requirement to determine whether a member has
received cash compensation other than the sales charges or service fees
disclosed in the prospectus is burdensome, particularly if a member
operates a mutual fund ``supermarket'' where payments may come from a
combination of Rule 12b-1 fees, sub-administrative fees and advisory
fees. FINRA disagrees. The sales charge and service fees amounts that
are paid to members must be clearly disclosed in an investment company
prospectus. If a member is or will be receiving cash compensation
beyond the amounts disclosed in the prospectus fee table, the member
must disclose information about these additional payments. FINRA
believes that information concerning the pecuniary inducements that may
create incentives for broker-dealers to offer or recommend particular
investment company securities should be available to investors when
making an investment decision and that the importance of this
transparency cannot be offset by the number of different investment
company securities that a member may choose to offer. If a member is
uncertain as to the character of the payments it is or will be
receiving, it should err on the side of disclosing the receipt or
expected receipt of these payments.
Requests for Clarification
The Notice proposal would have required members to disclose the
details of any ``special sales charge or service fee arrangement'' that
was not made available on the same terms to all members that distribute
an offeror's investment company securities. Schwab, LPL and SIFMA
commented that ``special sales charge or service fee arrangement,'' as
defined in the Notice proposal, was unclear and confusing. The proposed
rule change no longer uses this term and has eliminated its definition.
The Notice proposal would have required members that receive any
form of cash compensation other than sales charges or service fees
disclosed in the prospectus to disclose, among other things, that the
member receives ``cash payments'' from an offeror other than such sales
charges or service fees. FSI and SIFMA commented that the term ``cash
payments'' is unclear, since it is not defined in the proposal. FINRA
has revised this provision to use the defined term ``cash
compensation'' in lieu of ``cash payments.''
In addition, the proposed rule change includes supplementary
information that provides guidance with respect to the definition of
``cash compensation.'' The guidance explains that ``cash compensation''
includes cash payments commonly known as ``revenue sharing'' which are
typically paid by the investment company's adviser or another affiliate
in connection with the distribution of investment company securities.
The guidance notes that ``cash compensation'' includes these payments
``whether they are based upon the amount of investment company assets
that a member's customers hold, the amount of investment company
securities that the member has sold, or any amount if the payment is
related to the sale and distribution of the investment company's
securities.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See proposed FINRA Rule 2341.01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Notice stated that revenue sharing payments can take many
forms, including an offeror's helping to pay the costs of a firm's
annual sales meeting.\29\ FSI, LPL and SIFMA all observed that NASD
Rule 2830(l)(5)(E) (and proposed FINRA Rule 2341(l)(5)(E)) permit an
offeror to contribute money toward a non-cash compensation arrangement
between a member and its associated persons, provided that the
arrangement meets the criteria in NASD Rule 2830(l)(5)(D) (and proposed
FINRA Rule 2341(l)(5)(D)). This provision thus allows an offeror to
contribute toward a member's annual sales meeting, provided the sales
meeting is a permissible non-cash compensation arrangement, without
having to disclose this contribution. These commenters argued that such
contributions should not be treated as revenue sharing, given that the
industry does not consider such payments to be revenue sharing. SIFMA
also commented that the description of ``revenue sharing'' in the
Notice conflicts with an SEC definition of the term, citing an SEC
enforcement order.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Regulatory Notice 09-34, at note 8.
\30\ See In the Matter of OppenheimerFunds, Inc. and
OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc., Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 52420, 2005 SEC LEXIS 2350 (Sept. 14, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that the Rule, both currently and as proposed, permits an
offeror to contribute money toward a member's annual sales meeting
(assuming the meeting complies with the requirements for an internal
non-cash compensation arrangement) does not preclude the need for a
member to disclose these payments as cash compensation. FINRA believes
that such payments raise the same conflict-of-interest issues as other
forms of revenue sharing, and thus should be disclosed.
FINRA also disagrees with SIFMA's assertion that its description of
revenue sharing is inconsistent with the SEC's past definitions of that
term. As far as FINRA is aware, the SEC has never defined the term
``revenue sharing'' in a
[[Page 26785]]
rule or proposed rule text. The definition cited by SIFMA is used
solely in the context of a settled enforcement action between the SEC
and a mutual fund investment adviser and its affiliated broker-dealer
distributor and, as such, should be considered exclusive to the facts
and circumstances discussed in that action. In fact, the SEC has stated
separately in the context of its mutual fund point-of-sale disclosure
proposal that revenue sharing ``may encompass multiple revenue
streams'' that ``not only pose potential conflicts of interest, but
also may have the indirect effect of reducing investors' returns by
increasing the distribution-related costs incurred by funds.'' \31\
Accordingly, FINRA believes that it is appropriate to require members
to disclose receipt of such payments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Securities Act Release No. 8358 (January 24, 2004), 69
FR 6438 (February 10, 2004) (Confirmation Requirements and Point of
Sale Disclosure Requirements for Transactions in Certain Mutual
Funds and Other Securities, and Other Confirmation Requirement
Amendments, and Amendments to the Registration Form for Mutual
Funds), at notes 17 & 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, the proposed rule change requires the cash
compensation disclosures to be delivered prior to the time a new
customer first purchases shares of an investment company through the
member. The proposed rule change's provisions provide separate
requirements for delivery of these disclosures to existing customers.
GWFS expressed uncertainty as to whom FINRA considers to be a
``customer,'' particularly where the member sells investment company
securities to a retirement plan. FINRA intends that these disclosures
be made to the person with whom the member has a customer relationship.
If a member sells investment company securities to a retirement plan,
the disclosure should be made to the retirement plan sponsor.
The Notice proposal would have required disclosure if a member had
received additional cash compensation ``within the previous 12
months.'' GWFS and LPL expressed uncertainty as to how this 12-month
period would be calculated (e.g., whether it would be a rolling period
or based on the calendar year). FINRA has clarified the proposed rule
change to require disclosure based on receiving or entering into an
arrangement to receive additional cash compensation within the previous
calendar year.
ICI and SIFMA inquired whether the cash compensation provisions
would require disclosure of the receipt of payments for services, such
as sub-administrative or sub-transfer agency fees. The term ``cash
compensation'' is defined broadly to mean ``any discount, concession,
fee, service fee, commission, asset-based sales charge, loan, override
or cash employee benefit received in connection with the sale and
distribution of investment company securities.'' If a member is
receiving fees from an offeror for services, such as sub-administrative
or sub-transfer agency fees, in connection with the sale and
distribution of investment company securities, then proposed FINRA Rule
2341(l)(4)(A) would require the member to disclose the receipt of these
fees, since they fall within the definition of ``cash compensation.''
In addition, proposed FINRA Rule 2341(l)(4)(C) would require the member
to describe this additional cash compensation and the services provided
or to be provided by the member for this additional cash compensation.
The Notice proposal would have required a member to disclose ``the
nature of any such cash payments received in the past 12 months.'' ICI
commented that it is not clear what ``the nature of any such payments''
means. Schwab and SIFMA recommended that the proposal instead require
firms to describe the nature of services they provide to offerors, and
the nature of the compensation received.
Based in part on these comments, FINRA revised the cash
compensation disclosure provision in several respects. As described
above, as proposed, the rule change would require a member that
receives, or has entered into an arrangement to receive, cash
compensation in addition to sales charges or service fees described in
the prospectus within the previous calendar year, to disclose in paper
or electronic form to a new customer prior to the time that the
customer first purchases shares of an investment company through the
member the fact that it receives (or will receive) such compensation.
The member would also have to disclose that this additional cash
compensation may influence the selection of investment company
securities that the member and its associated persons offer or
recommend to investors. Further, the member would have to provide a
reference to a web page or toll-free telephone number through which a
customer could obtain more information concerning the member's cash
compensation arrangements. The proposed rule change would require that,
for existing customers, the member provide these disclosures in paper
or electronic form to each such customer by the later of either: (a) 90
days after the effective date of the proposed rule change, or (b) prior
to the time the customer first purchases shares of an investment
company through the member after the effective date of the proposed
rule change (other than purchases through reinvestment of dividends or
capital distributions or through automatic investment plans).
The web page or toll-free number must provide a narrative
description of the additional cash compensation received from offerors
and any services provided by the member to the offeror or affiliates
for this additional compensation. Members will be allowed to use
narrative disclosure to explain these arrangements. FINRA believes
these revisions will make this provision clearer to members and will
provide more meaningful disclosure to investors than that proposed in
the Notice.
SIFMA inquired how the cash compensation disclosure requirements
would apply in the situation in which an introducing broker-dealer and
clearing firm share fees paid by an offeror. Assuming the introducing
firm sold investment company securities to a customer, the introducing
firm would be responsible for disclosing any additional cash
compensation it receives from an offeror, even if it shares such
additional compensation with a clearing firm. In such a situation, the
clearing firm would not be required to make the disclosures under
proposed FINRA Rule 2341 to the customer.
SIFMA and FSI also inquired as to the effect of the proposed
disclosures on guidance that FINRA previously provided in Notice to
Members 99-55, Question 15. In that guidance, FINRA addressed
a situation in which an offeror reimburses a registered
representative's prospecting trip expenses, such as travel, lodging and
meals related to meetings with customers, stating that the
reimbursement payment would have to be made through the member and
disclosed as cash compensation in accordance with NASD Rule 2830(l)(4).
Under the proposed rule change, FINRA would consider such payments from
an offeror to be additional cash compensation that must be disclosed in
accordance with proposed FINRA Rule 2341(l)(4).
Internet Disclosure
In the Notice, FINRA requested comment on how the required
information should be disclosed to investors, particularly given the
availability of the Internet. In particular, FINRA asked whether
members should be permitted to deliver initial disclosure information
to customers electronically, unless a customer specifically requested
paper-based disclosure. Alternatively, FINRA asked whether the rule
should
[[Page 26786]]
allow firms to provide generalized disclosure to investors when an
account is opened regarding the receipt of cash compensation that
refers the investor to a Web site address or toll-free telephone number
that provides more information.
FSI, GWFS, ICI, LPL and SIFMA all supported revising the proposal
to allow web-based disclosure, unless a customer specifically requests
paper-based disclosure. FINRA has revised the proposal to allow members
to utilize the Internet or a toll-free number to provide more detailed
information concerning cash compensation arrangements to investors.
FINRA has also specified that if a customer specifically requests
paper-based disclosure, the member must deliver this information to the
customer in paper form promptly.
Compliance Date
Schwab commented that, if the proposal is adopted, FINRA should
give members at least 180 days following adoption to comply with its
requirements. FSI and LPL argued for at least 24 months' lead time
before requiring firms to comply with the proposal. As stated in Item 2
of the proposed rule change, FINRA will announce the implementation
date of the proposed rule change in a Regulatory Notice to be published
no later than 90 days following Commission approval. The implementation
date will be no later than 365 days following Commission approval. In
establishing the effective date, FINRA will take into account that
firms would need to modify their compliance systems in light of the new
required disclosures.
Other Compensation Disclosure Comments
The Notice proposal would have required a member to disclose the
names of each offeror that paid additional cash compensation, listed in
descending order based on the amount of compensation received from each
offeror. FSI recommended that the proposal be revised to permit listing
offerors in alphabetical order instead. FINRA has revised this
provision to eliminate the requirement to list offerors in descending
order based on amounts of cash compensation received. As revised, the
proposed rule change does not require that offerors be listed in a
particular order, as long as the disclosure requirements are met.
ICI recommended that the cash compensation provisions have a de
minimis threshold below which disclosure of cash compensation payments
would not be required. ICI suggested that, if cash compensation
payments from a single fund complex represent 1% or less of the
aggregate cash compensation received by a member, no disclosure should
be required. FINRA does not believe a de minimis disclosure threshold
is appropriate. Whether particular cash compensation payments create
potential conflicts of interest will depend on the surrounding facts
and circumstances, and investors should be provided with the
opportunity to evaluate the nature of any such conflicts. Accordingly,
FINRA believes the rule should require members to disclose any amount
of additional cash compensation received from an offeror.
The Notice proposal included a paragraph (l)(4)(E) that provided
that the disclosure requirements of paragraph (l)(4)(B) of the Notice
proposal would not apply to cash compensation in the form of sales
charges and service fees disclosed in a fund's prospectus fee
table.\32\ ICI recommended that this paragraph be deleted as redundant
given that language in paragraph (l)(4)(B) already excluded this
compensation from the disclosure requirements. FINRA agrees and has
deleted this paragraph in the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ The disclosure requirements of paragraph (l)(4)(B) of the
Notice proposal would now be set forth, as revised, in paragraph
(l)(4)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USAA argued that the cash compensation provisions should exclude
members that do not pay their registered representatives direct
commissions. FINRA disagrees, since cash compensation arrangements can
create potential conflicts of interest even in the absence of a
commission-based compensation system for registered representatives.
For example, a member may select investment companies to be included on
its preferred list based in part on cash compensation received from
offerors.
Warner Norcross recommended that the cash compensation provisions
be revised to require disclosure at the point of sale of any cash
compensation not disclosed in the prospectus. It also recommended that
the rule prohibit recommended sales based on payouts and require
members to put the interests of customers first. FINRA believes that
the proposed rule's disclosure requirements strike a rational balance
between providing access to customers of important compensation
information that may in part underlie a broker-dealer's decision to
offer investment company securities and the efficient delivery of
services to customers. FINRA will continue to assess the best mode of
all disclosure to customers including assessing whether information
access or point of sale disclosure requirements result in greater
utilization of disclosure information. With respect to firms'
obligations regarding recommendations to customers, FINRA notes that
the SEC recently approved new FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability), which sets
forth the basis for determining the suitability of a recommended
transaction or investment strategy involving a security or
securities.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See Regulatory Notice 11-02 (January 2011) (SEC Approves
Consolidated FINRA Rules Governing Know-Your-Customer and
Suitability Obligations). See also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 63325 (November 17, 2010), 75 FR 71479 (November 23, 2010) (File
No. SR-FINRA-2010-039; Order Granting Accelerated Approval, As
Modified by Amendment, to Proposed Rule Change to Adopt FINRA Rules
2090 (Know Your Customer) and 2111 (Suitability) in the Consolidated
FINRA Rulebook); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64260 (April 8,
2011), 76 FR 20759 (April 13, 2011) (File No. SR-FINRA-2011-016;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
to Delay the Implementation Date of FINRA Rule 2090 (Know Your
Customer) and FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Cash Compensation Provisions
NASD Rule 2830(l)(3) requires members to keep records of all
compensation received by a member or its associated persons from
offerors, except for gifts and entertainment permitted by paragraphs
(l)(5)(A) and (l)(5)(B). The records must include the names of the
offerors, the names of the associated persons, the amount of cash, and
the nature and, if known, the value of non-cash compensation received.
The Notice proposed to eliminate the ``if known'' qualification for the
value of non-cash compensation received.
Schwab, FSI and SIFMA all urged FINRA to add language to the non-
cash compensation provisions to expressly permit members to estimate
the value of goods and services received for which a receipt or other
documentation of value is unavailable. FINRA has added supplementary
material to the rule which would expressly permit a member to estimate
in good faith the value of non-cash compensation received when a
receipt or other documentation of value is unavailable.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory
[[Page 26787]]
organization consents, the Commission will:
(A) By order approve or