SEC Enforcement

CBOE Will Pay $6M Penalty Over SEC Charges Alleging Failure to Enforce Trading Rules

Published on: June 12, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Chicago Board Options Exchange, which is the largest options exchange in the United States, has consented to pay $6 million penalty to settle Securities and Exchange Commission charges accusing it of not fulfilling its obligation to enforce trading rules and failing to stop one firm member from engaging in abusive-short selling. The exchange is settling and taking corrective action but is not admitting to/denying wrongdoing.

While CBOE is an SRO (self-regulating organization), the SEC has wide oversight over trading. This is the first penalty that an exchange is paying for purported regulatory oversight failures. The Commission is also censuring the exchange, which means a tougher sanction could result if the alleged violation occurs again.

According to the regulator, in 2008, CBOE transferred the monitoring of member firms’ compliance via a rule for curbing abusive short-selling practices to a different department. This, contends the SEC, hurt the exchange’s ability to enforce the rule. (Short-selling involves a trader betting that a stock will drop in value. Short-sellers borrow the shares of a company, sell them, and then purchase them when the stock fails, giving them back to the lender while keeping the price difference. Unfortunately, too much short-selling focusing on weak companies can cause them to fail, inciting market volatility.)

NASAA President Pushes for State Regulation of “Reg A Plus” and for Private Lawsuits Over Small Offerings

Published on: May 28, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

State Securities Regulators and others are battling over how the US Securities and Exchange Commission should create a $50 million offering cap for exempt offerings under regulation A. The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act had ordered the SEC to establish the new exemption but gave no deadline. Referred to by SEC staff as “Reg A Plus,” the agency’s Division of Corporation Finance rulemaking team has been working on the measure.

In a letter, the North American Securities Administrators Association urged the regulator to refuse to succumb to some commenters’ requests that state securities regulators not be included when it comes to the new exempt offerings. NASAA believes that state regulator oversight is key to making sure that these offerings are part of a successful public marketplace.

The letter, written by NASAA President A. Health Abshure, was in response to comments calling on the Commission to define what is a “qualified purchaser” under the 1933 Securities Act so that new offerings (or at least part of them) would be exempt from state blue sky registration. Abshure believes that limited state oversight for the new exemption would make it easier for scammers to use this exemption. He also says that making the securities freely tradable could increase the chances of financial fraud and abuse, which is why state regulation is so important.

SEC Securities Policy Roundup: Neither Admit, Nor Deny Policy, Pursuit of Injunctions for Misconduct, and SRO Oversight Get Closer Scrutiny

Published on: May 24, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

New SEC Chairman Reviews “Neither Admit, Nor Deny Wrongdoing” Policy

Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Jo White is taking a closer look at the agency’s practice of letting defendants that settle cases with it not have to admit to or deny the allegations. Critics of the policy have been vocal about how they believe that this lets violators get out of having to be accountable for any wrongdoing while not doing much to prevent them from repeating such actions again. Currently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is trying to determine whether a district court acted properly when it turned down the $285M securities settlement reached between Citigroup (C) and the SEC over the financial firm’s involvement in a 2007 collateralized debt obligation.

Testifying in front of Congress in her new role as SEC Chairman for the first time, White spoke about how despite her decision to review the practice, she does believes the policy has saved agency resources while giving investors’ their money back much quickly than if wrongdoing had to be proven.

Hedge Fund Manager Philip Falcone Consents to $18M Securities Fraud Settlement

Published on: May 16, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Hedge fund billionaire Philip Falcone and his Harbinger Group (HRG) have reached an $18 million securities fraud settlement, an agreement in principle, with the SEC over allegations that he fraudulently took a $113 million loan from one of his funds to cover his taxes, manipulated the market, and gave preference to certain clients, including Goldman Sachs (GS). Falcone, who will personally pay $4 million, is settling the financial fraud case without admitting or denying wrongdoing. Although he can remain has CEO of his group and stay associated with Harbinger Capital Partners, he is barred from raise new money or using his hedge funds to make investments for two years.

The ban, however, doesn’t apply to the nine investment advisers that Falcone runs through the company. (This, some say, is so that Falcone can unwind the hedge fund without hurting investors.) The pending deal is once again raising questions about whether the SEC is doing enough to take action against wrongdoers in the industry.

For instance, Harbinger Group’s business that involves Falcone acting as a private equity investor in different companies is not really impacted by the SEC settlement. Also, the independent monitor selected by the SEC to watch the firm is one who was on a list that Falcone recommended.

SEC Sues Traders Over Alleged Scam Involving Bribe Paid to Venezuelan Official to Get Bond Trading Business

Published on: May 15, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The SEC is suing four traders affiliated with brokerage firm Direct Access Partners for their alleged involvement in a financial scam that involved millions of dollars paid in illicit bribes to a Venezuelan banking official to obtain that bank’s bond trading business.

According to the regulator, DAPs’ global markets group made fixed income trades for clients in foreign sovereign debt, generating revenue of over $66M from markup/markdown transaction fees on principal trade executions in Venezuela bonds sponsored by the state for BANDES (Banco de Desarrollo Económico y Social de Venezuela). The bank’s finance VP, María de los Ángeles González de Hernandez is accused of allegedly authorizing the illicit trades and receiving part of the revenue.

The securities scam is said to have taken place between October 2008 and at least June 2010. Because of the purported kickbacks paid to Gonzales, DAP was given the bank’s profitable trading business, while she was provided with incentives to get into trades with DAP at significant markdowns and markups regardless of the prices that BANDES paid. The traders are also accused of fooling DAP’s clearing brokers, inter-positioning one broker-dealer to cover up their involvement in the transactions, performing internal wash trades, and taking part in huge roundup trades to bulk up revenue.

Per the Commission regarding the trades: Thomas Bethancourt executed the trades that were fraudulent and kept track of the illicit markdowns/markups; Iuri Bethancourt was given over $20M in illicit proceeds through his shell company, which would pay Gonzales; Hurtado, who allegedly earned over $6M in kickbacks, was the one who paid Gonzales and acted as her intermediary with the traders; and Hurtado’s wife, Haydee Pabon, purportedly was given about $8M in markdowns/markups on BANDES trades under the guise of finders’ fees.

Read the Complaint (PDF)

More Blog Posts:
SEC Commissioner Aguilar Calls For the Abolishment of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, April 21, 2013

Federal Records Act Lawsuit Seeking to Make the SEC Reconstruct About 9,000 Enforcement-Related Documents is Dismissed, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, February 5, 2013

Controversial Democratic Appointee Pushes SEC for Less Talk About Investor and Securities Market Protections and More Action

Published on: April 28, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to Securities and Exchange Commissioner Luis Aguilar, the growing number of registered investment advisers, the increasing complexity of the financial instruments they use, and the recent trends in securities examinations show that there is a need for the regulator to up the vigorousness of its investment adviser examinations and enforcement activities. He noted that even as the SEC is working to give the regulated community best practices and guidance to enhance compliance, it also intends to increase its scrutiny of advisers, including more exams (especially for private fund advisers). Alternative investment managers will also get more attention.

Aguilar pointed out that with the number SEC registered investment advisers having gone up about 50% to over 10,000 last year, the value of the assets that they manage also increasing from about $22 trillion in 2002 to approximately $44 trillion in 2011, as well as a rise in the number of complex financial instruments that advisers use, there are more chances for “mischief” to happen. Hence, there is the need for more robust enforcement.

Also, as our securities fraud law firm mentioned in a previous blog post, the SEC commissioner wants there to be an end to mandatory arbitration agreements. Per the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the SEC now can prohibit or limit pre-dispute arbitration agreements, which have become standard fare for brokerage firms. Aguilar is concerned that they are also becoming routine for investment advisory firms. He wants the government to ponder the possibility of adopting rules that would stop or limit broker-dealers and investment advisers from mandating that customers sign clauses in their agreements with one another that prevents them from filing securities fraud lawsuits and instead only resolve their disputes via arbitration.

SEC OCIE Finds Custody-Related Deficiencies Involving Investment Advisers

Published on: April 3, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, it discovered “significant deficiencies” related to custody issues with a third of the investment advisers that it examined, including:

• Failure of an investment adviser to recognize when it has custody • Failure to satisfy the rule’s surprise exam requirements • Failure to fulfill the rule’s qualified custodian requirements

Custody by investment advisers refers either to the holding of securities or client funds or the authority to possess them, including the power of attorney to get securities or funds from client accounts. The 1940 Investment Advisers Act’s Rule 206(4)-2 regarding custody prescribes specific requirements for client asset safety.

“Substituted Compliance” Should Regulate Cross-Border Swaps, Says SEC Chairman Elisse Walter

Published on: April 3, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Elisse Walter, the best way to regulate global over-the-counter derivatives regulation is via “substituted compliance.” Such an approach would let a market participant comply with domestic requirements in a certain area through compliance with comparable foreign regulation while also allowing the domestic regulator to keep applying specific policy requirements of local law when the foreign one fails to impose requirements or protections that compare.

Per its Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act Title VII mandate, the SEC intends to put forth a proposal on how to tackle cross-boarder issues. Although the Commission hasn’t figure out how it will go forward with this proposal, Walter stressed that “substituted compliance” could act as a “a reasonable and necessary middle ground” between making foreign participants abide by domestic regulation and widely recognizing foreign swap regimes. She believes that while efforting to give the maximum substituted compliance possible, properly tailored cross-border regulation would take care of the potentially significant regulatory gaps that are likely to exist between jurisdictions.

Walter believes that regulators need to be participating in the world debate on how to cut down systemic risk. Also, noting that brokerage firms, investment advisers, and other market participants that the SEC oversees differs from traditional banking institutes, Walter cautioned that failure to identify these key differences ups the risk that there will be weaker financial institutions and less options for businesses looking for investment capital.

SEC Actions Roundup: Bridge Premium Finance Settles Over Alleged $6M Ponzi Scam, Ex-Lancer Group Hedge Fund Manager’s Lawyer Sues Over FOIA Request, & Private Equity Firm Ranieri Partners Settles Securities Allegations

Published on: March 24, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

SEC Settles with Bridge Premium Finance Over Alleged $6M Ponzi

The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado has approved a proposed settlement between the SEC and Premium Finance LLC, William Sullivan, and Michael Turnock. The three of them are accused of selling financing so that small businesses could cover their insurance premiums. The alleged Ponzi scam purportedly cost investors $6 million, even as they were promised up to 12% in returns.

Judge John Kane had initially rejected the proposed settlement, which came with SEC’s standard language allowing defendants to resolve cases without denying or admitting to the allegations. Pointing to strong federal policy that favors consent judgments and the “limited and deferential” review the courts have over such agreements, last month the Commission asked the court to reconsider. It also noted that such admissions could hurt the regulator’s enforcement program, potentially causing harm to the public. Turnock and Sullivan also filed a response to the complaint and admitted to some of the allegations.

Securities Law and Congress Roundup: SEC Plans to Look at Corporate Political Spending Has Some Republicans Asking Why, Regulator Wants Lawmakers To Set Up Independent Auditor for Advisory Firms, & DOJ Stands by Its Record on Prosecuting Financial Firms

Published on: March 19, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

SEC Plans to Look at Corporate Political Spending Has Some Republicans Asking Why

In a letter to Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Elisse Walter, a number of House Republicans, including Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), asked why the agency plans to consider making corporate political spending disclosures a requirement when this matter seems “unrelated to its mandate” that it protect investors, maintain the markets, and “facilitate capital formation.” The lawmakers expressed concern that such a move by the SEC would be “especially problematic” seeing as it has no experience in this matter and the writing of such a rule would likely require much in terms of resources and staff.

The Congressional lawmakers said that the Commission should concentrate not on a “discretionary rule” but on a rulemaking that is mandatory. They pointed to the agency’s delays in getting the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act efected in time for the mandated statutory deadline. They are asking why resources should be allocated to non-essential rulemaking that brings up serious concerns.