Close Close

Regulation and Compliance > Federal Regulation > SEC

Readers spot holes in Court decision

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Last week we reported that the U.S. Court of Appeals had remanded Rule 151A, sending it back to the SEC for further analysis and investigation.

Since that time, we’ve heard from many of you, voicing your thoughts on this decision. Below, we’ve collected some of the comments, so you can get an idea of what other advisors are saying about the topic.


What a joke! Why remand back the case to the agency who is hell bent upon making index annuities a securities product so all the broker-dealers can take a cut on production that they have been losing out so badly.

Screw the investors — who cares about them? So long as the broker-dealers can make money, the SEC and FINRA will be happy campers.

If the court was impartial, they would have asked a 3rd party to take over further review.
– Neil Barma

Why would 151A increase competition? Any decent economist knows that rules create barriers to entry and thus reduce competition.
– Alan Grissom

The most important issue before the court that appears to have been skirted was whether an EIA could be defined as a security. The rest is just fluff. The SEC can create all kinds of guidelines for efficiencies and capital formation. I do not see those issues as deal breakers. I am not pleased with this outcome.
– Mel Chilewich