Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Address Broker-Dealers With a Significant History of Misconduct, 43627-43630 [2020-15450]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 138 / Friday, July 17, 2020 / Notices printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549–1090 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 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. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number 4–698 and should be submitted on or before August 3, 2020. By the Commission. J. Matthew DeLesDernier, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2020–15461 Filed 7–16–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34–89305; File No. SR–FINRA– 2020–011] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Address BrokerDealers With a Significant History of Misconduct khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES July 13, 2020. I. Introduction On April 3, 2020, 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 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to amend FINRA’s rules to help further address the issue of broker-dealers with a significant history of misconduct and the firms that employ them. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on April 14, 2020.3 On May 27, 2020, FINRA consented to an extension of the time period in which the Commission must approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). CFR 240.19b–4. 3 See Exchange Act Release No. 88600 (Apr. 8, 2020), 85 FR 20745 (Apr. 14, 2020) (File No. SR– FINRA–2020–011) (‘‘Notice’’). 2 17 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Jul 16, 2020 Jkt 250001 approve or disapprove the proposed rule change to July 13, 2020.4 On July 2, 2020, FINRA responded to the comment letters received in response to the Notice and filed an amendment to the proposed rule change (‘‘Amendment No. 1’’).5 The Commission is publishing this order pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act 6 to solicit comments on Amendment No. 1 from interested persons and to institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1. Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with respect to the proposed rule change, nor does it mean that the Commission will ultimately disapprove the proposed rule change. Rather, as discussed below, the Commission seeks additional input from interested parties on the changes to the proposed rule change, as set forth in Amendment No. 1. II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change Background FINRA’s proposed rule change would: (1) Amend the FINRA Rule 9200 Series (Disciplinary Proceedings) and the 9300 Series (Review of Disciplinary Proceedings by National Adjudicatory Council and FINRA Board; Application for SEC Review) to allow a hearing officer to impose conditions or restrictions on the activities of a respondent member broker-dealer or respondent associated person, and require the member broker-dealer employing a respondent associated person to adopt heightened supervisory procedures for such associated person, when a disciplinary matter is appealed to the National Adjudicatory Council (‘‘NAC’’) or called for NAC review; (2) amend the FINRA Rule 9520 Series (Eligibility Proceedings) to require member broker-dealers to adopt heightened supervisory procedures for statutorily disqualified associated persons during the period a statutory disqualification eligibility request is under review by FINRA; (3) amend 4 See letter from Michael Garawski, Associate General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to Daniel Fisher, Branch Chief, Division of Trading and Markets, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, dated May 27, 2020. 5 See letter from Michael Garawski, Associate General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, dated July 2, 2020 (‘‘FINRA Letter’’). The FINRA Letter is available at the Commission’s website at https://www.sec.gov/ comments/sr-finra-2020-011/srfinra20200117399761-219028.pdf. 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 43627 FINRA Rule 8312 (FINRA BrokerCheck Disclosure) to require the disclosure through FINRA BrokerCheck of the status of a member broker-dealer as a ‘‘taping firm’’ under FINRA Rule 3170 (Tape Recording of Registered Persons by Certain Firms); and (4) amend the FINRA Rule 1000 Series (Member Application and Associated Person Registration) to require a member broker-dealer to submit a written request to FINRA’s Department of Member Regulation, through the Membership Application Group (‘‘MAP Group’’), seeking a materiality consultation and approval of a continuing membership application, if required, when a natural person that has, in the prior five years, one or more ‘‘final criminal matters’’ or two or more ‘‘specified risk events’’ seeks to become an owner, control person, principal or registered person of the member brokerdealer.7 Proposed Rule Change to the FINRA Rule 9200 Series (Disciplinary Proceedings) and the 9300 Series (Review of Disciplinary Proceeding by National Adjudicatory Council and FINRA Board; Application for SEC Review) Currently, FINRA rules require that when a hearing panel or hearing officer decision is on appeal or review before the NAC, any sanctions imposed by the hearing panel or hearing officer decision, including bars and expulsions, are automatically stayed and not enforced against the respondent during the pendency of the appeal or review proceeding.8 In turn, the filing of an application for Commission review stays the effectiveness of any sanction, other than a bar or an expulsion, imposed in a decision constituting a final FINRA disciplinary action.9 In the Notice, FINRA expressed concern about customers who could engage in securities transactions with 7 See Notice at 20745. The proposed rule change would impact all members, including members that are funding portals or have elected to be treated as capital acquisition brokers (‘‘CABs’’), given that the funding portal rule set incorporates the Rule 9200 Series and Rule 9300 Series and Rule 9556 by reference, and the CAB rule set incorporates Rules 1011, 1017 and 8312 and the Rule 9200 Series, Rule 9300 Series and Rule 9500 Series by reference. In addition, FINRA is proposing corresponding amendments to CAB Rule 111, to reflect that a CAB would be subject to IM–1011–3, and amendments to Funding Portal Rule 900(b) to require heightened supervision during the time an eligibility request is pending. See Notice at note 61. 8 See FINRA Rules 9311(b) and 9312(b). In contrast, an appeal to the NAC or a call for NAC review does not stay a decision, or that part of a decision, that imposes a permanent cease and desist order. See FINRA Rules 9311(b) and 9312(b). 9 See FINRA Rule 9370(a). E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 43628 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 138 / Friday, July 17, 2020 / Notices disciplined respondents during the pendency of an appeal from, or a NAC review of, a hearing panel or hearing officer disciplinary decision.10 According to FINRA, ‘‘authorizing Hearing Officers to impose conditions or restrictions during the period an appeal or review proceeding is pending would allow FINRA to target the demonstrated bad conduct of a respondent during the pendency of an appeal or review and add an interim layer of investor protection while the appellate review of the disciplinary proceeding remains pending.’’ 11 Accordingly, FINRA proposed amendments to its Rule 9200 Series and Rule 9300 Series that would authorize hearing officers to impose conditions or restrictions on disciplined respondents and require broker-dealers to adopt heightened supervision plans concerning their associated persons who are the disciplined respondents.12 The proposed rule change would require a heightened supervision plan to be reasonably designed and tailored to include specific supervisory policies and procedures that address the violations found and be reasonably designed to prevent or detect a reoccurrence of the violations.13 The proposed rule change would also establish a process for an expedited review by the Review Subcommittee of the NAC of any such conditions or restrictions imposed.14 Specifically, proposed Rule 9285(a) would provide that the hearing officer who participated in an underlying disciplinary proceeding and found that a respondent violated a statute or rule provision which is subsequently appealed to the NAC or called for NAC review, may impose conditions or restrictions on the activities of the respondent during the appeal as the hearing officer considers reasonably necessary for the purpose of preventing customer harm.15 Under the proposed rule change, the conditions or restrictions imposed by a hearing officer would remain in place until FINRA’s final decision takes effect and all appeals are exhausted.16 10 See Notice at 20746. Notice at 20748. 12 See Notice at 20746. 13 See Notice at 20748. 14 See Notice at 20746. 15 See Notice at 20747. Additionally, the Notice sets forth in greater detail how this process would operate. 16 See Notice at 20748. The proposed rule change would also amend Rule 9556 to grant FINRA the authority to bring an expedited proceeding against a respondent that fails to comply with conditions and restrictions imposed pursuant to proposed Rule 9285 that could result in a suspension or cancellation of membership or suspension or bar khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 11 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Jul 16, 2020 Jkt 250001 Proposed Rule Change to the FINRA Rule 9520 Series (Eligibility Proceedings) The FINRA Rule 9520 Series sets forth rules governing eligibility proceedings, in which FINRA evaluates whether to allow a member, person associated with a member, potential member or potential associated person subject to a statutory disqualification to enter or remain in the securities industry.17 These eligibility proceedings require a broker-dealer to propose a written plan of heightened supervision of the statutorily disqualified associated person that would become effective upon FINRA’s approval of the brokerdealer’s application to associate with the statutorily disqualified person.18 The proposed rule change would amend FINRA Rule 9522 to require a member broker-dealer that files an application to continue associating with a disqualified person under FINRA Rule 9522(a)(3) or Rule 9522(b)(1)(B) to include an interim plan of heightened supervision that would be in effect throughout the entirety of the application review process.19 The proposed rule change would delineate the circumstances under which a statutorily disqualified person may remain associated with a member broker-dealer while FINRA is reviewing the application.20 Proposed Rule Change to FINRA Rule 8312 (FINRA BrokerCheck Disclosure) FINRA Rule 8312 governs the information FINRA releases to the public through its BrokerCheck system. Currently, FINRA Rule 8312(b) requires that FINRA release information about, among other things, whether a particular member broker-dealer is subject to the provisions of FINRA Rule 3170 (the ‘‘Taping Rule’’), but only in response to telephonic inquiries via the BrokerCheck toll-free telephone listing.21 The proposed rule change would remove the requirement that FINRA inform the public that a brokerfrom associating with any FINRA member. See Notice at 20749. 17 See Notice at 20750. 18 See Notice at 20750. 19 See Notice at 20749. 20 See id. 21 See FINRA Rule 8312(b). The Taping Rule is designed to help ensure that a broker-dealer with a significant number of registered persons that previously were employed by ‘‘disciplined firms’’ has specified supervisory procedures in place to prevent fraudulent and improper sales practices or customer harm. See Notice at 20751. Under the Taping Rule, a broker-dealer with a specified percentage of registered persons who have been associated with disciplined firms in a registered capacity in the last three years is designated as a ‘‘taping firm.’’ See FINRA Rule 3170. PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 dealer is subject to the Taping Rule only in response to telephonic inquiry via the BrokerCheck toll-free telephone listing.22 Specifically, proposed FINRA Rule 8312(b) would require FINRA to release through BrokerCheck information as to whether a particular broker-dealer is subject to the Taping Rule (a ‘‘taping firm’’).23 FINRA believes that broadening the disclosure through BrokerCheck of the status of a brokerdealer as a taping firm would help inform more investors of the heightened procedures required of the brokerdealer, which may incentivize investors to research more carefully the background of an associated person associated with the taping firm.24 Proposed Rule Change to FINRA Rule 1000 Series (Member Application and Associated Person Registration) The FINRA Rule 1000 Series govern, among other things, FINRA’s membership proceedings. Currently, a member broker-dealer is permitted (subject to exceptions) to expand its business under the safe-harbor set forth in IM–1011–1 without the filing and prior approval of a continuing membership application.25 For example, under the existing parameters of this safe harbor, a broker-dealer could hire an associated person even if he or she has a significant history of misconduct.26 The proposed rule change would limit the application of the safe harbor by imposing additional obligations on a member broker-dealer when a natural person who has, in the prior five years, either one or more ‘‘final criminal matters’’ or two or more ‘‘specified risk events’’ seeks to become an owner, control person, principal or registered person of the broker-dealer.27 Specifically, when a natural person seeking to become an owner, control person, principal or registered person of a member broker-dealer has, in the prior 22 See Notice at 20751. id. 24 See id. 25 See Notice at 20752. 26 See id. Currently, none of the safe harbor’s parameters relates to the history of a broker-dealer’s associated persons. However, based on its review of studies indicating the predictability of future regulatoryrelated events for associated persons with a history of past regulatory-related events, FINRA is concerned about instances where a broker-dealer hires associated persons with a significant history of misconduct within the safe-harbor parameters, thus avoiding prior consultation or review by FINRA. FINRA believes there are instances in which hiring of an associated person with a significant history of misconduct should be considered a material change in business operations. See Notice at 20752. 27 See Notice at 20752. The proposed rule change would also adopt definitions of ‘‘final criminal matter’’ and ‘‘specified risk event.’’ 23 See E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 138 / Friday, July 17, 2020 / Notices five years, one or more ‘‘final criminal matters’’ or two or more ‘‘specified risk events,’’ proposed Rule 1017(a)(7) would require a member broker-dealer to either: (1) File a continuing membership application or (2) submit a written request seeking a materiality consultation for the contemplated activity with the MAP Group.28 If the broker-dealer seeks a materiality consultation, the MAP Group would consider, among other things, whether the ‘‘final criminal matters’’ or ‘‘specified risk events’’ are customerrelated; whether they represent discrete actions or are based on the same underlying conduct; the anticipated activities of the person; the disciplinary history, experience and background of the proposed supervisor, if applicable; the disciplinary history, supervisory practices, standards, systems and internal controls of the member firm and whether they are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and regulations and FINRA rules.29 Where FINRA determines that a contemplated change is material, FINRA would instruct the broker-dealer to file a continuing membership application if it intends to proceed with such change. Proposed Rule 1017(a)(7) would establish that the safe-harbor for business expansions in IM–1011–1 would not be available to a member broker-dealer when a materiality consultation is required.30 Additionally, the proposed rule change would adopt a corresponding change to IM–1011–3 (Business Expansions and Persons with Specified Risk Events) to specify that the safeharbor for business expansions in IM– 1011–1 would not be available to any broker-dealer seeking to add a natural person who: (i) Has, in the prior five years, one or more ‘‘final criminal matters’’ or two or more ‘‘specified risk events’’ and (ii) seeks to become an owner, control person, principal or registered person of the member.31 In those circumstances, proposed IM– 1011–3 would provide that if the brokerdealer is not otherwise required to file a continuing membership application, it must comply with the requirements of proposed FINRA Rule 1017(a)(7).32 The Commission has received five comment letters on the proposed rule change. In response to comments, FINRA submitted the FINRA Letter and Amendment No. 1, amending the 28 See Notice at 20752 and 20753. Notice at 20753. 30 See id. 31 See id. 32 See id. 29 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Jul 16, 2020 Jkt 250001 proposed rule change as described below. III. Description of Amendment No. 1 In the initial filing of the proposed rule change, proposed FINRA Rule 1011(h) defined the term ‘‘final criminal matter’’ to mean ‘‘a final criminal matter that resulted in a conviction of, or guilty plea or nolo contendere (no contest) by, a person that is disclosed, or was required to be disclosed, on the applicable Uniform Registration Forms.’’ Proposed FINRA Rule 1011(p) defined the term ‘‘specified risk event’’ to mean any one of several specified events ‘‘that are disclosed, or are or were required to be disclosed, on an applicable Uniform Registration Form.’’ The ‘‘was required to be disclosed’’ language in the proposed ‘‘final criminal matter’’ definition differs in substance from the ‘‘are or were required to be disclosed’’ language in the proposed ‘‘specified risk event’’ definition.33 In response to comments, FINRA agreed with some commenters that ‘‘this difference should be eliminated, and that both definitions should include disclosures that are required if the member firm and person proceed with the contemplated change, including disclosures that are required on Uniform Registration Forms that have not yet been executed.’’ Thus, FINRA amended proposed FINRA Rule 1011(h) to include in the definition of ‘‘final criminal matter’’ a relevant criminal event that ‘‘is or was’’ required to be disclosed on a Uniform Registration Form, and to make some grammar- and syntax-related modifications.34 Also in response to comments, FINRA amended proposed FINRA Rule 1017(a)(7) to define ‘‘owner’’ and ‘‘control person’’ for purposes of that proposed rule (and, by extension, IM– 1011–3).35 Specifically, Amendment No. 1 would modify proposed FINRA Rule 1017(a)(7) to provide that, ‘‘for purposes of FINRA Rule 1017(a)(7): (i) the term ‘owner’ has the same meaning as ‘direct owner’ on Form BD Schedule A and ‘indirect owner’ on Form BD Schedule B; and (ii) that ‘control person’ means a person who would have ‘control’ as defined on Form BD.’’ 36 id. id. 35 See id. 36 See id. (stating that ‘‘[d]efining ‘control person’ by reference to the Form BD definition of ‘control’ means that the term would not be defined with reference to the term ‘controlling’ as defined in the FINRA By-Laws, Art. I(h).’’) PO 00000 43629 IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove File No. SR– FINRA–2020–011 and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.37 Institution of proceedings is appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy issues raised by the proposed rule change. As noted above, institution of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act,38 the Commission is providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration. The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional analysis and input concerning whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules thereunder, in particular Section 15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act, 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.39 Under the Commission’s Rules of Practice, the ‘‘burden to demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the [Exchange Act] and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is on the [SRO] that proposed the rule change.’’ 40 The description of a proposed rule change, its purpose and operation, its effect, and a legal analysis of its consistency with applicable requirements must all be sufficiently detailed and specific to support an affirmative Commission finding,41 and any failure of an SRO to provide this information may result in the Commission not having a sufficient basis to make an affirmative finding that a proposed rule change is consistent with the Exchange Act and the applicable rules and regulations.42 For the reasons discussed above, the Commission believes it is appropriate to institute proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act to allow for additional consideration of the issues raised by the proposed rule 33 See 34 See Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 37 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). id. 39 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 40 Rule 700(b)(3), Commission Rules of Practice, 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3). 41 See id. 42 See id. 38 See E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1 43630 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 138 / Friday, July 17, 2020 / Notices change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, as it determines whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.43 V. Request for Written Comments The Commission requests that interested persons provide written submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have with the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1. In particular, the Commission invites the written views of interested persons concerning whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act, or any other provision of the Exchange Act, rules, and regulations thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of views, data, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b–4, any request for an opportunity to make an oral presentation.44 Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, should be approved or disapproved by August 3, 2020. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person’s submission must file that rebuttal by August 7, 2020. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission’s internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ sec.gov. Please include File No. SR– FINRA–2020–011 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549–1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR–FINRA–2020–011. This file number should be included on the subject line 43 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, as amended by the Securities Acts Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94–29, 89 Stat. 97 (1975), grants the Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding—either oral or notice and opportunity for written comments—is appropriate for consideration of a particular proposed rule change by a self-regulatory organization. See Securities Acts Amendments of 1975, Report of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs to Accompany S. 249, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975). khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES 44 Section VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:23 Jul 16, 2020 Jkt 250001 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 website (https://www.sec.gov/ rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, 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 website 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 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR–FINRA– 2020–011 and should be submitted on or before August 3, 2020. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by August 7, 2020. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.45 J. Matthew DeLesDernier, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. 2020–15450 Filed 7–16–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [SEC File No. 270–154, OMB Control No. 3235–0122] Proposed Collection; Comment Request Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549–2736 Extension: Rule 17a–10 45 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30– 3(a)(57). PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (‘‘PRA’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments on the existing collection of information provided for in Rule 17a–10, Report of Revenue and Expenses (17 CFR 240.17a–10), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) (‘‘Exchange Act’’). The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) for extension and approval. The primary purpose of Rule 17a–10 is to obtain the economic and statistical data necessary for an ongoing analysis of the securities industry. Paragraph (a)(1) of Rule 17a–10 generally requires broker-dealers that are exempted from the requirement to file monthly and quarterly reports pursuant to paragraph (a) of Exchange Act Rule 17a–5 (17 CFR 240.17a–5) to file with the Commission the Facing Page, a Statement of Income (Loss), and balance sheet from Part IIA of Form X–17A–5 1 (17 CFR 249.617), and Schedule I of Form X–17A–5 not later than 17 business days after the end of each calendar year. Paragraph (a)(2) of Rule 17a–10 requires a broker-dealer subject to Rule 17a–5(a) to submit Schedule I of Form X–17A–5 with its Form X–17A–5 for the calendar quarter ending December 31 of each year. The burden associated with filing Schedule I of Form X–17A–5 is accounted for in the PRA filing associated with Rule 17a–5. Paragraph (b) of Rule 17a–10 provides that the provisions of paragraph (a) do not apply to members of national securities exchanges or registered national securities associations that maintain records containing the information required by Form X–17A–5 and which transmit to the Commission copies of the records pursuant to a plan which has been declared effective by the Commission. The Commission staff estimates that approximately 46 broker-dealers will spend an average of 12 hours per year complying with Rule 17a–10. Thus, the total compliance burden is estimated to be approximately 552 hours per year. Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 1 Form X–17A–5 is the Financial and Operational Combined Uniform Single Report (‘‘FOCUS Report’’), which is used by broker-dealers to provide certain required information to the Commission. E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 138 (Friday, July 17, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43627-43630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15450]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89305; File No. SR-FINRA-2020-011]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory 
Authority, Inc.; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To 
Approve or Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment 
No. 1, To Address Broker-Dealers With a Significant History of 
Misconduct

July 13, 2020.

I. Introduction

    On April 3, 2020, 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 (``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend FINRA's rules to help 
further address the issue of broker-dealers with a significant history 
of misconduct and the firms that employ them. The proposed rule change 
was published for comment in the Federal Register on April 14, 2020.\3\ 
On May 27, 2020, FINRA consented to an extension of the time period in 
which the Commission must approve the proposed rule change, disapprove 
the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether 
to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change to July 13, 2020.\4\ 
On July 2, 2020, FINRA responded to the comment letters received in 
response to the Notice and filed an amendment to the proposed rule 
change (``Amendment No. 1'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 88600 (Apr. 8, 2020), 85 FR 
20745 (Apr. 14, 2020) (File No. SR-FINRA-2020-011) (``Notice'').
    \4\ See letter from Michael Garawski, Associate General Counsel, 
Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to Daniel Fisher, Branch Chief, 
Division of Trading and Markets, U.S. Securities and Exchange 
Commission, dated May 27, 2020.
    \5\ See letter from Michael Garawski, Associate General Counsel, 
Office of General Counsel, FINRA, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, 
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, dated July 2, 2020 (``FINRA 
Letter''). The FINRA Letter is available at the Commission's website 
at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2020-011/srfinra2020011-7399761-219028.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is publishing this order pursuant to Section 
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act \6\ to solicit comments on Amendment 
No. 1 from interested persons and to institute proceedings to determine 
whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, as modified 
by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission 
has reached any conclusions with respect to the proposed rule change, 
nor does it mean that the Commission will ultimately disapprove the 
proposed rule change. Rather, as discussed below, the Commission seeks 
additional input from interested parties on the changes to the proposed 
rule change, as set forth in Amendment No. 1.

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

Background

    FINRA's proposed rule change would: (1) Amend the FINRA Rule 9200 
Series (Disciplinary Proceedings) and the 9300 Series (Review of 
Disciplinary Proceedings by National Adjudicatory Council and FINRA 
Board; Application for SEC Review) to allow a hearing officer to impose 
conditions or restrictions on the activities of a respondent member 
broker-dealer or respondent associated person, and require the member 
broker-dealer employing a respondent associated person to adopt 
heightened supervisory procedures for such associated person, when a 
disciplinary matter is appealed to the National Adjudicatory Council 
(``NAC'') or called for NAC review; (2) amend the FINRA Rule 9520 
Series (Eligibility Proceedings) to require member broker-dealers to 
adopt heightened supervisory procedures for statutorily disqualified 
associated persons during the period a statutory disqualification 
eligibility request is under review by FINRA; (3) amend FINRA Rule 8312 
(FINRA BrokerCheck Disclosure) to require the disclosure through FINRA 
BrokerCheck of the status of a member broker-dealer as a ``taping 
firm'' under FINRA Rule 3170 (Tape Recording of Registered Persons by 
Certain Firms); and (4) amend the FINRA Rule 1000 Series (Member 
Application and Associated Person Registration) to require a member 
broker-dealer to submit a written request to FINRA's Department of 
Member Regulation, through the Membership Application Group (``MAP 
Group''), seeking a materiality consultation and approval of a 
continuing membership application, if required, when a natural person 
that has, in the prior five years, one or more ``final criminal 
matters'' or two or more ``specified risk events'' seeks to become an 
owner, control person, principal or registered person of the member 
broker-dealer.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notice at 20745.
    The proposed rule change would impact all members, including 
members that are funding portals or have elected to be treated as 
capital acquisition brokers (``CABs''), given that the funding 
portal rule set incorporates the Rule 9200 Series and Rule 9300 
Series and Rule 9556 by reference, and the CAB rule set incorporates 
Rules 1011, 1017 and 8312 and the Rule 9200 Series, Rule 9300 Series 
and Rule 9500 Series by reference. In addition, FINRA is proposing 
corresponding amendments to CAB Rule 111, to reflect that a CAB 
would be subject to IM-1011-3, and amendments to Funding Portal Rule 
900(b) to require heightened supervision during the time an 
eligibility request is pending. See Notice at note 61.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change to the FINRA Rule 9200 Series (Disciplinary 
Proceedings) and the 9300 Series (Review of Disciplinary Proceeding by 
National Adjudicatory Council and FINRA Board; Application for SEC 
Review)

    Currently, FINRA rules require that when a hearing panel or hearing 
officer decision is on appeal or review before the NAC, any sanctions 
imposed by the hearing panel or hearing officer decision, including 
bars and expulsions, are automatically stayed and not enforced against 
the respondent during the pendency of the appeal or review 
proceeding.\8\ In turn, the filing of an application for Commission 
review stays the effectiveness of any sanction, other than a bar or an 
expulsion, imposed in a decision constituting a final FINRA 
disciplinary action.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See FINRA Rules 9311(b) and 9312(b). In contrast, an appeal 
to the NAC or a call for NAC review does not stay a decision, or 
that part of a decision, that imposes a permanent cease and desist 
order. See FINRA Rules 9311(b) and 9312(b).
    \9\ See FINRA Rule 9370(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Notice, FINRA expressed concern about customers who could 
engage in securities transactions with

[[Page 43628]]

disciplined respondents during the pendency of an appeal from, or a NAC 
review of, a hearing panel or hearing officer disciplinary 
decision.\10\ According to FINRA, ``authorizing Hearing Officers to 
impose conditions or restrictions during the period an appeal or review 
proceeding is pending would allow FINRA to target the demonstrated bad 
conduct of a respondent during the pendency of an appeal or review and 
add an interim layer of investor protection while the appellate review 
of the disciplinary proceeding remains pending.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice at 20746.
    \11\ See Notice at 20748.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, FINRA proposed amendments to its Rule 9200 Series and 
Rule 9300 Series that would authorize hearing officers to impose 
conditions or restrictions on disciplined respondents and require 
broker-dealers to adopt heightened supervision plans concerning their 
associated persons who are the disciplined respondents.\12\ The 
proposed rule change would require a heightened supervision plan to be 
reasonably designed and tailored to include specific supervisory 
policies and procedures that address the violations found and be 
reasonably designed to prevent or detect a reoccurrence of the 
violations.\13\ The proposed rule change would also establish a process 
for an expedited review by the Review Subcommittee of the NAC of any 
such conditions or restrictions imposed.\14\ Specifically, proposed 
Rule 9285(a) would provide that the hearing officer who participated in 
an underlying disciplinary proceeding and found that a respondent 
violated a statute or rule provision which is subsequently appealed to 
the NAC or called for NAC review, may impose conditions or restrictions 
on the activities of the respondent during the appeal as the hearing 
officer considers reasonably necessary for the purpose of preventing 
customer harm.\15\ Under the proposed rule change, the conditions or 
restrictions imposed by a hearing officer would remain in place until 
FINRA's final decision takes effect and all appeals are exhausted.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Notice at 20746.
    \13\ See Notice at 20748.
    \14\ See Notice at 20746.
    \15\ See Notice at 20747. Additionally, the Notice sets forth in 
greater detail how this process would operate.
    \16\ See Notice at 20748. The proposed rule change would also 
amend Rule 9556 to grant FINRA the authority to bring an expedited 
proceeding against a respondent that fails to comply with conditions 
and restrictions imposed pursuant to proposed Rule 9285 that could 
result in a suspension or cancellation of membership or suspension 
or bar from associating with any FINRA member. See Notice at 20749.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change to the FINRA Rule 9520 Series (Eligibility 
Proceedings)

    The FINRA Rule 9520 Series sets forth rules governing eligibility 
proceedings, in which FINRA evaluates whether to allow a member, person 
associated with a member, potential member or potential associated 
person subject to a statutory disqualification to enter or remain in 
the securities industry.\17\ These eligibility proceedings require a 
broker-dealer to propose a written plan of heightened supervision of 
the statutorily disqualified associated person that would become 
effective upon FINRA's approval of the broker-dealer's application to 
associate with the statutorily disqualified person.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Notice at 20750.
    \18\ See Notice at 20750.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would amend FINRA Rule 9522 to require a 
member broker-dealer that files an application to continue associating 
with a disqualified person under FINRA Rule 9522(a)(3) or Rule 
9522(b)(1)(B) to include an interim plan of heightened supervision that 
would be in effect throughout the entirety of the application review 
process.\19\ The proposed rule change would delineate the circumstances 
under which a statutorily disqualified person may remain associated 
with a member broker-dealer while FINRA is reviewing the 
application.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Notice at 20749.
    \20\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change to FINRA Rule 8312 (FINRA BrokerCheck Disclosure)

    FINRA Rule 8312 governs the information FINRA releases to the 
public through its BrokerCheck system. Currently, FINRA Rule 8312(b) 
requires that FINRA release information about, among other things, 
whether a particular member broker-dealer is subject to the provisions 
of FINRA Rule 3170 (the ``Taping Rule''), but only in response to 
telephonic inquiries via the BrokerCheck toll-free telephone 
listing.\21\ The proposed rule change would remove the requirement that 
FINRA inform the public that a broker-dealer is subject to the Taping 
Rule only in response to telephonic inquiry via the BrokerCheck toll-
free telephone listing.\22\ Specifically, proposed FINRA Rule 8312(b) 
would require FINRA to release through BrokerCheck information as to 
whether a particular broker-dealer is subject to the Taping Rule (a 
``taping firm'').\23\ FINRA believes that broadening the disclosure 
through BrokerCheck of the status of a broker-dealer as a taping firm 
would help inform more investors of the heightened procedures required 
of the broker-dealer, which may incentivize investors to research more 
carefully the background of an associated person associated with the 
taping firm.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See FINRA Rule 8312(b). The Taping Rule is designed to help 
ensure that a broker-dealer with a significant number of registered 
persons that previously were employed by ``disciplined firms'' has 
specified supervisory procedures in place to prevent fraudulent and 
improper sales practices or customer harm. See Notice at 20751. 
Under the Taping Rule, a broker-dealer with a specified percentage 
of registered persons who have been associated with disciplined 
firms in a registered capacity in the last three years is designated 
as a ``taping firm.'' See FINRA Rule 3170.
    \22\ See Notice at 20751.
    \23\ See id.
    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change to FINRA Rule 1000 Series (Member Application and 
Associated Person Registration)

    The FINRA Rule 1000 Series govern, among other things, FINRA's 
membership proceedings. Currently, a member broker-dealer is permitted 
(subject to exceptions) to expand its business under the safe-harbor 
set forth in IM-1011-1 without the filing and prior approval of a 
continuing membership application.\25\ For example, under the existing 
parameters of this safe harbor, a broker-dealer could hire an 
associated person even if he or she has a significant history of 
misconduct.\26\ The proposed rule change would limit the application of 
the safe harbor by imposing additional obligations on a member broker-
dealer when a natural person who has, in the prior five years, either 
one or more ``final criminal matters'' or two or more ``specified risk 
events'' seeks to become an owner, control person, principal or 
registered person of the broker-dealer.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Notice at 20752.
    \26\ See id.
    Currently, none of the safe harbor's parameters relates to the 
history of a broker-dealer's associated persons. However, based on 
its review of studies indicating the predictability of future 
regulatory-related events for associated persons with a history of 
past regulatory-related events, FINRA is concerned about instances 
where a broker-dealer hires associated persons with a significant 
history of misconduct within the safe-harbor parameters, thus 
avoiding prior consultation or review by FINRA. FINRA believes there 
are instances in which hiring of an associated person with a 
significant history of misconduct should be considered a material 
change in business operations. See Notice at 20752.
    \27\ See Notice at 20752. The proposed rule change would also 
adopt definitions of ``final criminal matter'' and ``specified risk 
event.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, when a natural person seeking to become an owner, 
control person, principal or registered person of a member broker-
dealer has, in the prior

[[Page 43629]]

five years, one or more ``final criminal matters'' or two or more 
``specified risk events,'' proposed Rule 1017(a)(7) would require a 
member broker-dealer to either: (1) File a continuing membership 
application or (2) submit a written request seeking a materiality 
consultation for the contemplated activity with the MAP Group.\28\ If 
the broker-dealer seeks a materiality consultation, the MAP Group would 
consider, among other things, whether the ``final criminal matters'' or 
``specified risk events'' are customer-related; whether they represent 
discrete actions or are based on the same underlying conduct; the 
anticipated activities of the person; the disciplinary history, 
experience and background of the proposed supervisor, if applicable; 
the disciplinary history, supervisory practices, standards, systems and 
internal controls of the member firm and whether they are reasonably 
designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and 
regulations and FINRA rules.\29\ Where FINRA determines that a 
contemplated change is material, FINRA would instruct the broker-dealer 
to file a continuing membership application if it intends to proceed 
with such change. Proposed Rule 1017(a)(7) would establish that the 
safe-harbor for business expansions in IM-1011-1 would not be available 
to a member broker-dealer when a materiality consultation is 
required.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Notice at 20752 and 20753.
    \29\ See Notice at 20753.
    \30\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the proposed rule change would adopt a corresponding 
change to IM-1011-3 (Business Expansions and Persons with Specified 
Risk Events) to specify that the safe-harbor for business expansions in 
IM-1011-1 would not be available to any broker-dealer seeking to add a 
natural person who: (i) Has, in the prior five years, one or more 
``final criminal matters'' or two or more ``specified risk events'' and 
(ii) seeks to become an owner, control person, principal or registered 
person of the member.\31\ In those circumstances, proposed IM-1011-3 
would provide that if the broker-dealer is not otherwise required to 
file a continuing membership application, it must comply with the 
requirements of proposed FINRA Rule 1017(a)(7).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See id.
    \32\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has received five comment letters on the proposed 
rule change. In response to comments, FINRA submitted the FINRA Letter 
and Amendment No. 1, amending the proposed rule change as described 
below.

III. Description of Amendment No. 1

    In the initial filing of the proposed rule change, proposed FINRA 
Rule 1011(h) defined the term ``final criminal matter'' to mean ``a 
final criminal matter that resulted in a conviction of, or guilty plea 
or nolo contendere (no contest) by, a person that is disclosed, or was 
required to be disclosed, on the applicable Uniform Registration 
Forms.'' Proposed FINRA Rule 1011(p) defined the term ``specified risk 
event'' to mean any one of several specified events ``that are 
disclosed, or are or were required to be disclosed, on an applicable 
Uniform Registration Form.'' The ``was required to be disclosed'' 
language in the proposed ``final criminal matter'' definition differs 
in substance from the ``are or were required to be disclosed'' language 
in the proposed ``specified risk event'' definition.\33\ In response to 
comments, FINRA agreed with some commenters that ``this difference 
should be eliminated, and that both definitions should include 
disclosures that are required if the member firm and person proceed 
with the contemplated change, including disclosures that are required 
on Uniform Registration Forms that have not yet been executed.'' Thus, 
FINRA amended proposed FINRA Rule 1011(h) to include in the definition 
of ``final criminal matter'' a relevant criminal event that ``is or 
was'' required to be disclosed on a Uniform Registration Form, and to 
make some grammar- and syntax-related modifications.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See id.
    \34\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also in response to comments, FINRA amended proposed FINRA Rule 
1017(a)(7) to define ``owner'' and ``control person'' for purposes of 
that proposed rule (and, by extension, IM-1011-3).\35\ Specifically, 
Amendment No. 1 would modify proposed FINRA Rule 1017(a)(7) to provide 
that, ``for purposes of FINRA Rule 1017(a)(7): (i) the term `owner' has 
the same meaning as `direct owner' on Form BD Schedule A and `indirect 
owner' on Form BD Schedule B; and (ii) that `control person' means a 
person who would have `control' as defined on Form BD.'' \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See id.
    \36\ See id. (stating that ``[d]efining `control person' by 
reference to the Form BD definition of `control' means that the term 
would not be defined with reference to the term `controlling' as 
defined in the FINRA By-Laws, Art. I(h).'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove File No. 
SR-FINRA-2020-011 and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act to determine whether the proposed rule 
change should be approved or disapproved.\37\ Institution of 
proceedings is appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy 
issues raised by the proposed rule change. As noted above, institution 
of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any 
conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act,\38\ the 
Commission is providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under 
consideration. The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for 
additional analysis and input concerning whether the proposed rule 
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the Exchange 
Act and the rules thereunder, in particular Section 15A(b)(6) of the 
Exchange Act, 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.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See id.
    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the ``burden to 
demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the 
[Exchange Act] and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is 
on the [SRO] that proposed the rule change.'' \40\ The description of a 
proposed rule change, its purpose and operation, its effect, and a 
legal analysis of its consistency with applicable requirements must all 
be sufficiently detailed and specific to support an affirmative 
Commission finding,\41\ and any failure of an SRO to provide this 
information may result in the Commission not having a sufficient basis 
to make an affirmative finding that a proposed rule change is 
consistent with the Exchange Act and the applicable rules and 
regulations.\42\ For the reasons discussed above, the Commission 
believes it is appropriate to institute proceedings pursuant to Section 
19(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act to allow for additional consideration 
of the issues raised by the proposed rule

[[Page 43630]]

change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, as it determines whether the 
proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Rule 700(b)(3), Commission Rules of Practice, 17 CFR 
201.700(b)(3).
    \41\ See id.
    \42\ See id.
    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written 
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the 
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have 
with the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1. In 
particular, the Commission invites the written views of interested 
persons concerning whether the proposed rule change, as modified by 
Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 15A(b)(6) of the Exchange 
Act, or any other provision of the Exchange Act, rules, and regulations 
thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to 
approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral 
presentation of views, data, and arguments, the Commission will 
consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any request for an opportunity to 
make an oral presentation.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, as amended by the 
Securities Acts Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29, 89 Stat. 97 
(1975), grants the Commission flexibility to determine what type of 
proceeding--either oral or notice and opportunity for written 
comments--is appropriate for consideration of a particular proposed 
rule change by a self-regulatory organization. See Securities Acts 
Amendments of 1975, Report of the Senate Committee on Banking, 
Housing and Urban Affairs to Accompany S. 249, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th 
Cong., 1st Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change, as modified by 
Amendment No. 1, should be approved or disapproved by August 3, 2020. 
Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's 
submission must file that rebuttal by August 7, 2020.
    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include 
File No. SR-FINRA-2020-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities 
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-FINRA-2020-011. 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 website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). 
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written 
statements with respect to the proposed rule change, as modified by 
Amendment No. 1, that are filed with the Commission, and all written 
communications relating to the proposed rule change, as modified by 
Amendment No. 1, 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 website 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 
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available 
for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All 
comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting 
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal 
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit 
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All 
submissions should refer to File No. SR-FINRA-2020-011 and should be 
submitted on or before August 3, 2020. Rebuttal comments should be 
submitted by August 7, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-15450 Filed 7-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.