Close Close
Sign In
Newsletters
Popular Financial Topics Discover relevant content from across the suite of ALM legal publications From the Industry More content from ThinkAdvisor and select sponsors Investment Advisor Issue Gallery Read digital editions of Investment Advisor Magazine Tax Facts Get clear, current, and reliable answers to pressing tax questions
Luminaries Awards
Podcast Center Video Center Webcasts Resource Center Events
About ThinkAdvisor Contact Us Advertise With Us Asset & Logo Licensing Sitemap Terms of Service Privacy Policy Copyright © 2024 ALM Global, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
ThinkAdvisor

Regulation and Compliance > Federal Regulation > FINRA

Why Brokers Must Testify — Or Else

By Jeff Berman

X
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Outisde the FINRA building in New York. Outside FINRA headquarters in New York. (Photo: Shutterstock)

The most common offense that gets brokers barred from the financial industry isn’t fraud, excessive trading or making unsuitable recommendations. It’s failing to testify or provide information to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority when requested.

Rule 8210 requires FINRA-registered reps to do so, and the penalties for noncompliance can be steep.

FINRA has barred more than 730 brokers in the last two years, and more than a third of those cases involved Rule 8210 violations, Jessica Hopper, FINRA Enforcement executive vice president, said Monday in a blog post.

Because FINRA is not a government entity, it does not have the ability to subpoena information, she pointed out, adding: “What we do have is FINRA Rule 8210 — a crucial tool that FINRA relies on to protect investors and the market by requiring individuals under FINRA’s jurisdiction to provide information when requested.”

Although barring a rep for violating Rule 8210 — “a seemingly administrative rule — may seem severe,” she explained that, “in reality, the underlying wrongdoing that led to the Rule 8210 request is often quite serious; in many cases, there are suspicions of fraud, conversion of customer funds or other egregious misconduct.”

And that is “typically the untold story behind the story in disciplinary actions citing Rule 8210 violations, as it is rare to find specifics about the underlying misconduct that led to the 8210 request in the case documentation,” she said, adding: “That is because, often, the respondent refuses to cooperate in an investigation at its earliest stage.”

— Related on ThinkAdvisor:

Jeff Berman

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.