Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt FINRA Rule 3230 (Telemarketing) in the FINRA Consolidated Rulebook, 5611-5613 [2012-2396]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 23 / Friday, February 3, 2012 / Notices
pilot program. For this reason, the
Commission designates the proposed
rule change to be operative upon
filing.11
At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File No. SR–FINRA–
2012–006 and should be submitted on
or before February 24, 2012.
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:
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.12
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
No. SR–FINRA–2012–006 on the subject
line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File No.
SR–FINRA–2012–006. This file number
should be included on the subject line
if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for 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
11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day
operative delay, the Commission has also
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:48 Feb 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
[FR Doc. 2012–2403 Filed 2–2–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–66279; File No. SR–FINRA–
2011–059]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change To Adopt
FINRA Rule 3230 (Telemarketing) in the
FINRA Consolidated Rulebook
January 30, 2012.
I. Introduction
On October 13, 2011, the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’ or ‘‘Act’’) 1 and
Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
change to adopt FINRA Rule 3230
(Telemarketing) in the FINRA
Consolidated Rulebook. The proposed
rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on November 2,
2011.3 The Commission received one
comment letter, from the Cornell
Securities Law Clinic (the ‘‘Clinic’’), in
response to the proposal,4 and a
response from FINRA to the Clinic’s
12 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Exchange Act Release No. 65645 (November
2, 2011), 76 FR 67787 (November 4, 2011)
(‘‘Notice’’).
4 See comment letter submitted by William A.
Jacobson, Associate Clinical Professor and Director,
Cornell Securities Law Clinic, and Tamara
Gavrilova, Cornell Law School, Class of 2013, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, SEC, dated
November 21, 2011 (‘‘Cornell Letter’’).
1 15
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5611
comments.5 The text of the proposed
rule change and FINRA’s Response
Letter are available on FINRA’s Web site
at https://www.finra.org, at the principal
office of FINRA, on the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.sec.gov, and at
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
This order approves the proposed rule
change.
II. Description of the Proposal
As described in more detail in the
Notice,6 FINRA proposed to adopt
FINRA Rule 3230 (Telemarketing) based
largely on NASD Rule 2212. FINRA also
proposed to delete NYSE Rule 440A and
its Interpretation,7 but to include certain
of their provisions in Rule 3230. These
include caller identification rules based
on Rule 440A(h) requiring members
engaging in telemarketing to transmit
caller identification information to
persons they call and not to block the
transmission of such information. In
addition, FINRA proposed to include
provisions substantially similar to those
contained in rules of the Federal Trade
Commission (‘‘FTC’’) that prohibit
deceptive and other abusive
telemarketing acts or practices. These
include a provision requiring members
making outbound telephone calls to
maintain a record of a person’s request
not to receive such calls indefinitely
rather than for only five years.
FINRA explained that NASD Rule
2212 and NYSE Rule 440A are similar
rules that require members to maintain
do-not-call lists, limit the hours of
telephone solicitations and prohibit
members from using deceptive and
abusive acts and practices in connection
with telemarketing. The Commission
directed FINRA and NYSE to enact
these telemarketing rules in accordance
with the Telemarketing Consumer Fraud
and Abuse Prevention Act of 1994
(‘‘Prevention Act’’).8 The Prevention Act
requires the Commission to promulgate
or direct any national securities
exchange or registered securities
association to promulgate rules
substantially similar to the FTC rules to
prohibit deceptive and other abusive
telemarketing acts or practices.9
In 2003, the FTC and the Federal
Communications Commission (‘‘FCC’’)
established a national do-not-call
registry, and, pursuant to the Prevention
5 See letter from Matthew E. Vitek, Counsel,
FINRA, to Elizabeth Murphy, Secretary, SEC, dated
December 15, 2011 (‘‘Response Letter’’).
6 See Notice, supra note 3.
7 For convenience, the Notice referred to
Incorporated NYSE Rules as NYSE Rules, and this
order follows that convention.
8 15 U.S.C. 6101–6108.
9 15 U.S.C. 6102.
E:\FR\FM\03FEN1.SGM
03FEN1
5612
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 23 / Friday, February 3, 2012 / Notices
Act, the Commission requested that
FINRA and NYSE amend their
telemarketing rules to require that their
members participate. In 2004, the
Commission approved amendments to
NASD Rule 2212 requiring member
firms to participate in the national donot-call registry.10 The following year,
the Commission approved amendments
to NYSE Rule 440A, which were similar
to the NASD rule amendments, but
included additional provisions
regarding the use of caller identification
information, pre-recorded messages,
telephone facsimiles and computer
advertisements.11
Earlier this year, Commission staff
directed FINRA to conduct a review of
its telemarketing rule and propose rule
amendments that provide protections at
least as strong as those provided by the
FTC’s telemarketing rules.12
Commission staff had expressed
concerns to FINRA and the other SROs
that, overall, their telemarketing rules
may not have kept pace with the FTC’s
rules, for example by not requiring a
firm-specific opt out to be honored
indefinitely as under the FTC’s rules,
and thus may no longer meet the
standards of the Prevention Act.13
FINRA filed the proposed rule change in
response to these concerns.14
FINRA advised that it would
announce the implementation date of
the proposed rule change in a
Regulatory Notice to be published no
later than 90 days following
Commission approval, and that the
implementation date would be no later
than 180 days following Commission
approval.15
III. Summary of Comments
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
In its comment letter,16 the Clinic
generally supported the proposed rule
on the basis that it would comply with
the Prevention Act and expressed the
belief that it would be ‘‘an important
step in preventing members from using
deceptive and abusive practices when
telemarketing.’’ The Clinic did,
however, make some proposed
recommendations.
The Clinic recommended that the
proposed rule should incorporate
additional provisions in NYSE Rule
10 See Exchange Act Release No. 49055 (January
12, 2004), 69 FR 2801 (January 20, 2004).
11 See Exchange Act Release No. 52579 (October
7, 2005), 70 FR 60119 (October 14, 2005).
12 See letter from Robert W. Cook, Director,
Division of Trading and Markets, SEC, to Richard
G. Ketchum, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
FINRA, dated May 10, 2011.
13 Id.
14 See Notice, supra note 3.
15 Id.
16 See Cornell Letter, supra note 4.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:48 Feb 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
440A regarding prerecorded messages
and the use of telephone facsimile or
computer advertisements. The Clinic
also recommended that FINRA revise its
proposal to eliminate the exception
from proposed Rule 3230(k), which
would permit prerecorded messages the
meet the conditions of the proposed
‘‘safe harbor’’ for abandoned calls under
proposed subparagraph (j)(2). In
addition, the Clinic opined that its
proposed amendments to the proposed
rule would provide customers with
additional protection against invasive
and abusive telemarketing techniques.
In its Response Letter,17 FINRA stated
that it did not believe it should amend
the proposed rule change to adopt the
Clinic’s proposed amendments. FINRA
stated that at the time the NYSE adopted
Rule 440A’s provisions regarding
prerecorded messages and the use of
telephone facsimile or computer
advertisements, the NYSE stated that
broker-dealers were subject to the FCC’s
telemarketing rules, and, accordingly,
the NYSE modeled NYSE Rule 440A
based on applicable FCC telemarketing
rules.18 Because broker-dealers remain
subject to substantially similar FCC
provisions regarding prerecorded
messages and the use of telephone
facsimile or computer advertisements,
FINRA believes that adding the
additional provisions of Rule 440A to
the proposed rule is unnecessary.19
Moreover, the proposed rule, at
Supplementary Material .01, includes a
reminder to member firms regarding
their obligation to comply with relevant
federal and state laws and rules,
including FCC rules.
FINRA also stated that it did not
believe it should eliminate the
exception from proposed Rule 3230(k),
which would permit prerecorded
messages the meet the conditions of the
proposed ‘‘safe harbor’’ for abandoned
calls under proposed subparagraph
(j)(2). FINRA stated that this exception
would be substantially similar to FCC
and FTC exemptions for prerecorded
messages complying with a ‘‘safe
harbor’’ for abandoned calls.20 In
addition, FINRA’s Response Letter cited
to the FTC’s rationale that ‘‘a total ban
on abandoned calls would amount to a
ban on predictive dialers, and would
not strike the proper balance between
addressing an abusive practice and
allowing for a technology that reduces
17 See
Response Letter, supra note 5.
(citing Exchange Act Release No. 52308
(August 19, 2005), 70 FR 49961, 49964 (August 25,
2005)).
19 Id. (citing 47 CFR 64.1200 and 47 CFR 68.318).
20 Id. (citing 16 CFR 310.4(b)(1)(v)).
18 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
costs for telemarketers.’’ 21 Further,
FINRA restated the FTC’s and FCC’s
recognition that ‘‘a prerecorded message
that provides identification information
not only mitigates consumers’ fears, but
also makes it easier for consumers to
make a do-not-call request of a company
by calling the number provided in the
message.’’ 22
IV. Discussion and Commission’s
Findings
After careful review of the proposed
rule change, the Cornell Letter, and
FINRA’s Response Letter, the
Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities
association.23 In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section
15A(b)(6) of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder.24 Section
15A(b)(6) of the Act requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules 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. The
proposed rule change is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, protect investors and
the public interest, and promote just
and equitable principles of trade by
strengthening protections against
deceptive and other abusive
telemarketing acts or practices in the
securities industry. Accordingly, the
Commission finds that good cause exists
to approve the proposed rule change.
V. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,25 that the
proposed rule change (SR–FINRA–
2011–059) be, and hereby is, approved.
21 Id. (citing FTC, Telemarketing Sales Rule, 68
FR 4580, 4642 (January 29, 2003)).
22 Id. (citing 68 FR 4580, supra note 23, at 4644,
and FCC, Rules and Regulations Implementing the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 68 FR 44144,
44164 (July 25, 2003).
23 In approving this proposal, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f). Commenters did not raise concerns
about the proposed rule’s impact on efficiency,
competition and capital formation.
24 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6).
25 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
26 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
E:\FR\FM\03FEN1.SGM
03FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 23 / Friday, February 3, 2012 / Notices
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.26
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–2396 Filed 2–2–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–66276; File No. SR–FINRA–
2011–071]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Granting
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change
To Increase the Trading Activity Fee
Rate for Transactions in Covered
Equity Securities
January 30, 2012.
I. Introduction
On December 14, 2011, the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a
proposed rule change to increase
FINRA’s Trading Activity Fee (‘‘TAF’’)
rate for transactions in covered equity
securities. The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the
Federal Register on December 30,
2011.3 The Commission received no
comments on the proposal. This order
approves the proposed rule change.
II. Description of the Proposal
FINRA’s proposal would amend
Section 1 of Schedule A to the FINRA
By-Laws to adjust the rate of FINRA’s
TAF for transactions in Covered
Securities that are equity securities.4
The rules governing the TAF also
include a list of exempt transactions.5
The TAF, along with the Personnel
Assessment and the Gross Income
Assessment fees, are used to fund
FINRA’s regulatory activities.6
The current TAF rate is $0.000090 per
share for each sale of a covered equity
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66050
(December 23, 2011), 76 FR 82334 (‘‘Notice’’)
4 Covered Securities are defined in Section 1 of
Schedule A to the FINRA By-Laws as: Exchangeregistered securities wherever executed (except debt
securities that are not TRACE-Eligible Securities);
OTC Equity Securities; security futures; TRACEEligible Securities (provided that the transaction is
a Reportable TRACE Transaction); and all
municipal securities subject to Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board reporting requirements.
5 See FINRA By-Laws, Schedule A, § 1(b)(2).
6 See FINRA By-Laws, Schedule A, § 1(a).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2 17
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:48 Feb 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
security, with a maximum charge of
$4.50 per trade.7 In the Notice, FINRA
stated that over 95% of TAF revenue is
generated by transactions in Covered
Securities that are equity securities.
Thus, FINRA’s revenue from the TAF is
substantially affected by changes in
trading volume in the equities markets.
According to FINRA, since it previously
increased the TAF in July 2011, there
was a momentary spike in equity
securities trading volume in the month
of August followed by a general decline
in volumes heading into the fourth
quarter of 2011. FINRA states that, as a
result of declining volume, it is
necessary to adjust the TAF rate for
2012 to ‘‘stabilize revenue flows
necessary to support FINRA’s regulatory
mission.’’ 8 Under the proposal, FINRA’s
TAF rate for Covered Securities that are
equity securities would increase by
$0.000005 per share, from $0.000090
per share to $0.000095 per share, while
the per-transaction cap for Covered
Securities that are equity securities
would increase by $0.25, from $4.50 to
$4.75. FINRA stated that increasing the
TAF rate on these securities by
$0.000005 per share is the minimum
increase necessary to bring the revenue
from the TAF to its needed levels to
adequately fund FINRA’s member
regulatory obligations and that it
intends the proposed increase to remain
revenue neutral, as it did previously
when it adjusted the TAF rate.9
FINRA stated that it intends to make
the proposal effective on February 1,
2012.
III. Discussion and Commission’s
Findings
After carefully considering the
proposed rule change, the Commission
finds that it is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to
a national securities association.10 In
particular, the Commission finds that
the proposal is consistent with Section
15A(b)(5) of the Act,11 which requires,
among other things, that FINRA rules
provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among members and issuers and other
persons using any facility or system that
FINRA operates or controls. The
7 The current TAF rates were approved by the
Commission on June 2, 2011. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 64590 (June 2, 2011), 76
FR 33388 (June 8, 2011).
8 Notice, 76 FR at 82335.
9 See id.
10 In approving the proposal, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule’s impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See
15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
11 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(5).
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5613
Commission believes that the proposal
is reasonably designed to secure
adequate funding to support FINRA’s
regulatory duties.
IV. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,12 that the
proposed rule change (SR–FINRA–
2011–071) be, and hereby is, approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.13
Kevin M. O’Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–2394 Filed 2–2–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
[License No. 07/07–0113]
C3 Capital Partners II, L.P.; Notice
Seeking Exemption Under 312 of the
Small Business Investment Act,
Conflicts of Interest
Notice is hereby given that C3 Capital
Partners II, L.P., 4520 Main Street, Suite
1600, Kansas City, Missouri 64111–
7700, a Federal Licensee under the
Small Business Investment Act of 1958,
as amended (‘‘the Act’’), in connection
with the financing of a small concern,
has sought an exemption under section
312 of the Act and section 107.730,
Financings Which Constitute Conflicts
of Interest of the Small Business
Administration (‘‘SBA’’) rules and
regulations (13 CFR 107.730 (2006)). C3
Capital Partners II, L.P., proposes to
provide financing to Findett LLC, P.O.
Box 0960, St. Charles, MO 63302–0960.
The financing is contemplated to
provide working capital.
The financing is brought within the
purview of Sec. 107.730(a)(1) of the
Regulations because C3 Capital Partners,
L.P., an Associate of C3 Capital Partners
II, L.P., currently owns greater than 10
percent of Findett LLC, and therefore,
Findett LLC, is considered an Associate
of C3 Capital Partners II as defined in
Sec. 105.50 of the regulations.
Notice is hereby given that any
interested person may submit written
comments on the transaction, within 15
days, to the Associate Administrator for
Investment, U.S. Small Business
12 15
13 17
E:\FR\FM\03FEN1.SGM
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
03FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5611-5613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2396]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-66279; File No. SR-FINRA-2011-059]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt FINRA
Rule 3230 (Telemarketing) in the FINRA Consolidated Rulebook
January 30, 2012.
I. Introduction
On October 13, 2011, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'' or ``Act'') \1\ and
Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to adopt FINRA Rule
3230 (Telemarketing) in the FINRA Consolidated Rulebook. The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on
November 2, 2011.\3\ The Commission received one comment letter, from
the Cornell Securities Law Clinic (the ``Clinic''), in response to the
proposal,\4\ and a response from FINRA to the Clinic's comments.\5\ The
text of the proposed rule change and FINRA's Response Letter are
available on FINRA's Web site at https://www.finra.org, at the principal
office of FINRA, on the Commission's Web site at https://www.sec.gov,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 65645 (November 2, 2011), 76 FR
67787 (November 4, 2011) (``Notice'').
\4\ See comment letter submitted by William A. Jacobson,
Associate Clinical Professor and Director, Cornell Securities Law
Clinic, and Tamara Gavrilova, Cornell Law School, Class of 2013, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, SEC, dated November 21, 2011
(``Cornell Letter'').
\5\ See letter from Matthew E. Vitek, Counsel, FINRA, to
Elizabeth Murphy, Secretary, SEC, dated December 15, 2011
(``Response Letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This order approves the proposed rule change.
II. Description of the Proposal
As described in more detail in the Notice,\6\ FINRA proposed to
adopt FINRA Rule 3230 (Telemarketing) based largely on NASD Rule 2212.
FINRA also proposed to delete NYSE Rule 440A and its Interpretation,\7\
but to include certain of their provisions in Rule 3230. These include
caller identification rules based on Rule 440A(h) requiring members
engaging in telemarketing to transmit caller identification information
to persons they call and not to block the transmission of such
information. In addition, FINRA proposed to include provisions
substantially similar to those contained in rules of the Federal Trade
Commission (``FTC'') that prohibit deceptive and other abusive
telemarketing acts or practices. These include a provision requiring
members making outbound telephone calls to maintain a record of a
person's request not to receive such calls indefinitely rather than for
only five years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Notice, supra note 3.
\7\ For convenience, the Notice referred to Incorporated NYSE
Rules as NYSE Rules, and this order follows that convention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA explained that NASD Rule 2212 and NYSE Rule 440A are similar
rules that require members to maintain do-not-call lists, limit the
hours of telephone solicitations and prohibit members from using
deceptive and abusive acts and practices in connection with
telemarketing. The Commission directed FINRA and NYSE to enact these
telemarketing rules in accordance with the Telemarketing Consumer Fraud
and Abuse Prevention Act of 1994 (``Prevention Act'').\8\ The
Prevention Act requires the Commission to promulgate or direct any
national securities exchange or registered securities association to
promulgate rules substantially similar to the FTC rules to prohibit
deceptive and other abusive telemarketing acts or practices.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 6101-6108.
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 6102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2003, the FTC and the Federal Communications Commission
(``FCC'') established a national do-not-call registry, and, pursuant to
the Prevention
[[Page 5612]]
Act, the Commission requested that FINRA and NYSE amend their
telemarketing rules to require that their members participate. In 2004,
the Commission approved amendments to NASD Rule 2212 requiring member
firms to participate in the national do-not-call registry.\10\ The
following year, the Commission approved amendments to NYSE Rule 440A,
which were similar to the NASD rule amendments, but included additional
provisions regarding the use of caller identification information, pre-
recorded messages, telephone facsimiles and computer
advertisements.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Exchange Act Release No. 49055 (January 12, 2004), 69
FR 2801 (January 20, 2004).
\11\ See Exchange Act Release No. 52579 (October 7, 2005), 70 FR
60119 (October 14, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earlier this year, Commission staff directed FINRA to conduct a
review of its telemarketing rule and propose rule amendments that
provide protections at least as strong as those provided by the FTC's
telemarketing rules.\12\ Commission staff had expressed concerns to
FINRA and the other SROs that, overall, their telemarketing rules may
not have kept pace with the FTC's rules, for example by not requiring a
firm-specific opt out to be honored indefinitely as under the FTC's
rules, and thus may no longer meet the standards of the Prevention
Act.\13\ FINRA filed the proposed rule change in response to these
concerns.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See letter from Robert W. Cook, Director, Division of
Trading and Markets, SEC, to Richard G. Ketchum, Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer, FINRA, dated May 10, 2011.
\13\ Id.
\14\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA advised that it would announce the implementation date of the
proposed rule change in a Regulatory Notice to be published no later
than 90 days following Commission approval, and that the implementation
date would be no later than 180 days following Commission approval.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Summary of Comments
In its comment letter,\16\ the Clinic generally supported the
proposed rule on the basis that it would comply with the Prevention Act
and expressed the belief that it would be ``an important step in
preventing members from using deceptive and abusive practices when
telemarketing.'' The Clinic did, however, make some proposed
recommendations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Cornell Letter, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Clinic recommended that the proposed rule should incorporate
additional provisions in NYSE Rule 440A regarding prerecorded messages
and the use of telephone facsimile or computer advertisements. The
Clinic also recommended that FINRA revise its proposal to eliminate the
exception from proposed Rule 3230(k), which would permit prerecorded
messages the meet the conditions of the proposed ``safe harbor'' for
abandoned calls under proposed subparagraph (j)(2). In addition, the
Clinic opined that its proposed amendments to the proposed rule would
provide customers with additional protection against invasive and
abusive telemarketing techniques.
In its Response Letter,\17\ FINRA stated that it did not believe it
should amend the proposed rule change to adopt the Clinic's proposed
amendments. FINRA stated that at the time the NYSE adopted Rule 440A's
provisions regarding prerecorded messages and the use of telephone
facsimile or computer advertisements, the NYSE stated that broker-
dealers were subject to the FCC's telemarketing rules, and,
accordingly, the NYSE modeled NYSE Rule 440A based on applicable FCC
telemarketing rules.\18\ Because broker-dealers remain subject to
substantially similar FCC provisions regarding prerecorded messages and
the use of telephone facsimile or computer advertisements, FINRA
believes that adding the additional provisions of Rule 440A to the
proposed rule is unnecessary.\19\ Moreover, the proposed rule, at
Supplementary Material .01, includes a reminder to member firms
regarding their obligation to comply with relevant federal and state
laws and rules, including FCC rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Response Letter, supra note 5.
\18\ Id. (citing Exchange Act Release No. 52308 (August 19,
2005), 70 FR 49961, 49964 (August 25, 2005)).
\19\ Id. (citing 47 CFR 64.1200 and 47 CFR 68.318).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINRA also stated that it did not believe it should eliminate the
exception from proposed Rule 3230(k), which would permit prerecorded
messages the meet the conditions of the proposed ``safe harbor'' for
abandoned calls under proposed subparagraph (j)(2). FINRA stated that
this exception would be substantially similar to FCC and FTC exemptions
for prerecorded messages complying with a ``safe harbor'' for abandoned
calls.\20\ In addition, FINRA's Response Letter cited to the FTC's
rationale that ``a total ban on abandoned calls would amount to a ban
on predictive dialers, and would not strike the proper balance between
addressing an abusive practice and allowing for a technology that
reduces costs for telemarketers.'' \21\ Further, FINRA restated the
FTC's and FCC's recognition that ``a prerecorded message that provides
identification information not only mitigates consumers' fears, but
also makes it easier for consumers to make a do-not-call request of a
company by calling the number provided in the message.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Id. (citing 16 CFR 310.4(b)(1)(v)).
\21\ Id. (citing FTC, Telemarketing Sales Rule, 68 FR 4580, 4642
(January 29, 2003)).
\22\ Id. (citing 68 FR 4580, supra note 23, at 4644, and FCC,
Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act, 68 FR 44144, 44164 (July 25, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Discussion and Commission's Findings
After careful review of the proposed rule change, the Cornell
Letter, and FINRA's Response Letter, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a
national securities association.\23\ In particular, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section
15A(b)(6) of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder.\24\
Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act requires, among other things, that FINRA
rules 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. The proposed
rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, protect investors and the public interest, and promote just
and equitable principles of trade by strengthening protections against
deceptive and other abusive telemarketing acts or practices in the
securities industry. Accordingly, the Commission finds that good cause
exists to approve the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). Commenters did not raise concerns
about the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation.
\24\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Conclusion
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\25\ that the proposed rule change (SR-FINRA-2011-059) be, and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
[[Page 5613]]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-2396 Filed 2-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P