Articles Posted in SEC

Published on: | by

On July 29, the House voted by voice to approve a bill that clears away any confusion regarding the Security and Exchange Commission’s authority to go after individuals accused of violating federal securities laws while working for a self-regulatory organization (New York Stock Exchange, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, etc.) even if they are now employed elsewhere.

Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif) had introduced H.R. 2623 last May. McCarthy says that the bill doesn’t broaden the SEC’s authority, but it does eliminate any questions about whether the agency can pursue “formerly associated persons” that are no long working for the SRO. McCarthy noted that there are “loopholes” in the 1934 Securities Act that let employees at certain organizations get out of being held accountable just by resigning.

The change also would make it obvious that the SEC can pursue former employees of registered clearing agencies, government securities broker-dealers, and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.

In the past, Congress has attempted to grant the SEC this authority. Although the Securities Act of 2008 contained an identical provision that the House passed by voice vote on suspension, this did not make it through the Senate Banking Commission. That bill also suggested that the SEC be given the authority to issue monetary fines in cease-and-desist proceedings, as well as during litigation.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass), who also chairs the House Financial Services Committee, made a motion to pass H.R. 2623 on suspension of the rules.

McCarthy says that Congress needs to codify the scope of the SEC’s authority of “formerly associated persons” of various entitites, including SRO’s, so that the courts can hear these cases rather than dismissing them because there is no statutory authority. McCarthy says it became clear that this kind of legislation was necessary in 2007 when the SEC accused Sal Sodano of failing to enforce compliance with the 1934 Securities Act. Sodano had been the CEO and chairman of the American Stock Exchange at the time the allegations were said to have taken place but by 2005 he had resigned from the Amex post. According to an administrative law judge, the law allowed the SEC to sanction former employers that had worked for different entities, but not an ex- SRO director or officer.

Related Web Resources:
House Passes Legislation Allowing SEC to Sanction Former SRO Officials, Financial Crisis Update, July 31, 2009
HR 2623, Washington Watch Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The Securities and Exchange Commission is suing Beverly Hills money manager Stanley Chais for securities fraud related to his alleged involvement in the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scam. The SEC alleges that Chais and four others worked collectively to raise billions of dollars from investors to fund the $65 billion scheme-the largest Ponzi scam in US history.

Chais investors’ accounts were worth almost $1 billion when the Ponzi scam finally collapsed. Chais, 82, is accused of collecting almost $270 million in investor fees. The Beverly Hills money manager, his family members, and associated entities are also accused of withdrawing almost $546 million in ill-gotten profits. The SEC is seeking financial penalties and the return of ill-gotten gains to investors.

The SEC complaint contends that Chais portrayed himself to his clients as an “investing wizard” and did not let them know that Madoff was actually in charge. The SEC says that Chais either knew that Madoff was running a Ponzi scam or was reckless for not knowing about the scheme. For example, Madoff never reported even one loss on thousands of “purported” stock trades on Chase’ accounts from 1999 to 2008. This alone should have been an indicator that Madoff’s reports were bogus.

Many of Chais’s investors have suffered as a result of the money manager’s alleged misconduct. For instance, the Los Angeles Times reports that Mark Peel, who is part owner and executive chef of Campanile, claims he lost $6 million from investments that Chais is accused of secretly making with Madoff. Peel had to sell his Hancock Park home because of the investment losses he sustained and almost all of his children lost their college funds.

Chais’s attorney denies that his client did anything wrong, did not know that Madoff was bilking investors, and was also a victim of the Madoff scam. Chais, 82, had over 40 accounts with Madoff for himself, family members, and other entities.

In another Madoff-related securities fraud case, the SEC has also filed a lawsuit against Cohmad Securities Corp, Chairman Maurice J. Cohn, executive Robert M. Jaffe, and COO Marcia B. Cohn over allegations that they ignored evidence that Madoff was engaged in a Ponzi scam and actively marketing opportunities with him.

Related Web Resources:
Beverly Hills money manager Stanley Chais accused of fraud, Los Angeles Times, June 23, 2009
Stanley Chais Accused Of Fraud – Raised Billions For The Bernie Madoff Ponzi Scheme, The Post Chronicle, June 22, 2009
Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The Securities and Exchange Commission has come under fire once more over its ability to regulate the parties under its watch. This time, the accusations are over possible incidents involving its own employees engaging in misconduct and abuse. These allegations don’t come at a good time for the SEC, which has already been accused of failing to effectively regulate investment firms, failing to prevent Bernard Madoff’s $50 billion ponzi scam, and failing to stop the some of Wall Street’s biggest investment banks from failing.

One allegation, reported in the Washington Post, accuses SEC Deputy Secretary Florence Harmon of using her position at the agency to “intimidate and influence” a Morgan Stanley broker because she disagreed with the way the firm was handling her mother’s account. She allegedly told a bank executive that the broker should have “Googled her” before talking to her. The broker reported Harmon’s behavior to Morgan Stanley and to investigators.

Harmon has reportedly told the SEC that the only reason she identified herself as an SEC employee is because she felt that the broker was making incriminating statements. The SEC’s inspector general has called Harmon’s alleged misconduct a potential violation of agency rules. While the inspector general didn’t name Harmon, another official confirmed that she was the regulator involved in the incident. The inspector general recommended disciplinary action and possible dismissal. Harmon continues her work as a regulator for the SEC.

Another probe accuses a number of SEC enforcement attorneys of trading United Health Group and Citigroup stocks, as well as other companies’ stocks, at about the same time that the SEC began investigating the firms. The SEC employees involved did not properly report the trades, which they are required to do, per agency rules. Still another investigation accuses a leading SEC official of committed perjury, in court and in writing, when talking about attempts to stop short-selling.

The issue of whether the SEC is able to properly deal with possible violations by its own employees-let alone those committed by the members of Wall Street that it regulates-has been under debate for months. US Senator Charles Grassley says the SEC needs a better compliance system to discourage employee misconduct and allow the public to feel confident that incidents of misbehavior aren’t systemic issues.

Meantime, SEC Inspector General H. David Kotz is also recommending new protections to prevent such abuses. In a report he wrote about the suspicious stock trades by SEC employees, which the Washington Post obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, Kotz noted that the agency’s lack of a proper compliance system makes it hard to make sure that staff members don’t also engage in insider trading.

The SEC says it is working on improving its current compliance policies. New changes are to include the hiring of a chief compliance officer, the installation of a computer system that will report trades made by SEC employees, and the clarification of its rules.

Related Web Resources:
Watchdog Digs Into Conduct At SEC, Washington Post, May 17, 2009
Florence Harmon Named Deputy Secretary, SEC, November 7, 2006
H. David Kotz Named New Inspector General at SEC, SEC, December 5, 2007 Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The Securities and Exchange Commission is suing Morgan Peabody Inc. owner and chief executive officer Davis Williams for allegedly misappropriating investor funds that were raised in three public offerings. Also named in the complaint were Williams Financial Group, Sherwood, and WFG Holdings. The defendants are accused of violating federal securities laws, including Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.

The SEC says that from January 2007 – September 2008, Williams notified Morgan Peabody registered representatives that they should sell and offer LLC promissory notes and debentures from WFG Holdings Inc. and Sherwood Secured Income Fund. He then allegedly used millions of dollars (he’d raised $9 million from investors) for personal purposes, including rent at his residence that cost almost $50,000 a month, at least $175,000 in personal travel, and over $200,000 in entertainment and food.

The SEC claims that WFG Holdings investors thought that their money was being invested in Morgan Peabody. Meantime, Sherwood investors were notified that most of their money would go into real estate. Instead, the SEC contends that Williams moved the investors’ money into bank accounts that he oversaw and used the money for personal purposes.

More than 100 investors in nine states purchased the securities. The SEC is seeking disgorgement, injunctive relief, and civil penalties.

Obtaining Financial Recovery from Securities Fraud
Investors that are the victims of securities fraud may be entitled to financial recovery. An experienced stockbroker fraud law firmcan help you successfully get through arbitration or court proceedings so that you recover your lost funds.

Related Web Resources:
SEC sues L.A. broker for fraud, Dailybreeze.com, April 21, 2009
SEC Charges Owner of California Broker-Dealer with Misappropriating Millions in Investor Funds, TradingMarkets.com, April 21, 2009 Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

US lawmakers are asking government regulators some tough questions about executive compensation at investment banks. Last week, Rep Dennis Kucinich, who heads the House Oversight Committee’s Domestic Policy Subcommittee, asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to determine whether Bank of America Corp. violated federal securities laws when it did not tell shareholders that Merrill Lynch was going to pay executives $3.62 billion in bonuses. Kucinich noted that these bonuses were 22 times larger than what AIG executives were offered-equivalent to 36.2% of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds that Merrill received.

A March filing by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (whose office is also pursuing this matter) claims that even though the firm had already made the decision to accelerate bonus payments, Merrill told Cuomo and the House Oversight Committee that it planned to make incentive compensation decisions at the end of the year. Cuomo claims that Bank of America neglected to tell shareholders that Merrill was going to offer executives big bonuses before the BofA merger was final.

When BofA was questioned about Cuomo’s claims, the bank said it revealed everything it was required to before the shareholders voted on the merger. Kucinich says that this makes him wonder about the SEC’s interpretation of fiduciary duty when it comes to revealing all “material” data to shareholders when asking for shareholder action and what is considers “material” information for proxy rules meant to protect investors under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

He asked the SEC whether it thinks that B of A’s omission is a material one and, if so, what it would do to redress it. The House Oversight Committee is trying to determine whether officials from Bank of America and Merrill misled Congress about the executive bonuses and their timing.

Meantime, Rep. Edolphus Towns, who oversees the House Committee and Oversight Reform, told Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner that he was worried about media reports that the Treasury Department was trying to “circumvent” statutory restrictions regarding executive pay for companies availing of TARP funds. Towns wants Geithner to respond to news reports that the Treasury Department established special entities to receive federal bailout funds that could then be channeled toward corporate recipients so as to avoid executive pay restrictions and requirements that the US get an ownership interest in the bailout firms. Towns cautioned that it would not be wise for the Treasury Department to allow excessive pay practices to continue at firms that taxpayers had bailed out.

Kucinich Asks If Merrill Bonuses Broke Laws, NY Times, April 7, 2009
Read Representative Towns’ Letter to Treasury Secretary Geithner (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The Securities and Exchange Commission wants feedback about the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s proposal on new financial responsibility rules. Critics have expressed concern that the rules give FINRA wide discretion but without certain safeguards.

The Financial responsibility rules let FINRA make sure that some 5,000 brokerage firms have enough liquidity available so that they can take care of customer claims in a timely manner. FINRA recently submitted a filing with the SEC explaining how the proposed rules would give the self-regulatory organization the authority it needs to act quickly during an emergency or another unforeseen event. FINRA says the necessary safeguards already are in place and vowed to be judicious when exercising this authority.

The proposed rules are based on existing requirements in NYSE and NASD rules. FINRA says that a large number of provisions will only apply to firms that carry or clear customer accounts and would prevent such members from withdrawing equity capital for up to one year without the SRO’s consent. Members would also have to let FINRA know no later than 24 hours after when certain financial triggers are hit.

FINRA has been trying to develop a consolidated rulebook since its formation in July 2007 when the New York Stock Exchange and NASD were merged together. Last May, FINRA requested comments about the rule proposals.

The SRO says a few commenters were worried about how much authority FINRA had under rule 4110(a). Other commenters asked for more specific about the kinds of actions the SRO would have the authority to implement. Another commenter expressed concern that FINRA’s authority to ask for an audit might be too broad. Still others expressed concern over how one proposed rule that prevented members from withdrawing capital for 12 months was even stricter than the SEC’s own requirements.

Related Web Resources:
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Rulemaking, SEC.gov Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

UBS Financial Services, Inc., UBS Securities, LLC, and Citigroup have reached finalized settlements with the Securities and Exchange Commission to pay tens of thousands of ARS investors almost $30 billion. The settlements will resolve SEC charges that the companies misled investors about the risks involved with auction rate securities.

The SEC’s complaint accused UBS and Citigroup of misleading customers by telling them ARS were liquid, safe investments and failing to warn them of the growing dangers when the market started to fail. When the ARS market froze in February, the SEC says both firms left tens of thousands of clients holding billions of dollars in illiquid ARS.

These finalized settlements will restore about $22.7 billion in liquidity to UBS clients who invested in ARS and some $7 billion to Citigroup investors. SEC Chairman Christopher Cox says investors will get back “100 cents on the dollar on their ARS investments.” Both firms will buy ARS from affected customers at PAR. Customers that sold their ARS under the par difference will be paid between par and the ARS sale price. This is the largest settlement in SEC history.

UBS and Citigroup are not admitting to or denying the SEC’s allegations by agreeing to settle. Both investment firms, however, have agreed to enjoinment from future violations.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York still needs to approve the settlements, and additional SEC penalties could still arise for UBS and Citi. The SEC is also waiting to finalize the settlements-in-principle it reached with Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, Wachovia, and RBC Capital Markets.

Related Web Resources:
SEC Finalizes ARS Settlements With Citigroup And UBS, Providing Nearly $30 Billion in Liquidity to Investors, SEC, December 11, 2008
SEC Complaint Against UBS (PDF)

SEC Complaint Against Citigroup (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

A few weeks ago, the Securities and Exchange Commission formally proposed a road map that could result in the mandatory adoption of international financial reporting standards by US domestic financial report filers. For the largest filers, this could start as soon as 2014.

Beginning November 14, the SEC has opened up a 90-day period for comment on the road map. The SEC’s 165-page report says that making IFRS mandatory should improve the comparability of financial data prepared by foreign companies and US public companies.

Seven “Milestones” Must Be Met in order to Allow IFRS use in the US, including:

• Improved quality of accounting standards at the IASB and Financial Accounting Standards Board.
• Progress toward a funding mechanism for the International Accounting Standards Committee Foundation that is safe, steady, and independent.
• Improved interactive data capabilities for IFRS reporting.
• Early, voluntary IFRS use to show how it will improve financial reporting comparability.
• Proper IFRS education and training for investors, accountants, and auditors.
• SEC rule making fits that with domestic IFRS use.
• Determining whether it makes sense to adopt mandatory IFRS use and figuring out the best ways to sequence it.

Under the SEC proposal, large companies that meet specific criteria would be allowed to apply voluntarily for IFRS in the US. The SEC says that the increase in competition between global markets to raise capital is a key reason for letting US companies use IFRS within the country. The SEC also notes the value of adopting a single, widely accepted set of standards that would benefit US investors and the international markets.

According to Stockbroker Fraud Attorney William Shepherd: “In early 2007, we commented on the “race to bottom” regarding de-regulation and the ever-looser accounting standards for global corporations. Since then, we have witnessed a global meltdown of the financial industry. Yet, deregulation champion SEC Chairman Chris Cox, who has apparently never met a white collar criminal he did not adore, is using his last few days in office to relinquish accounting standards to foreign control. This comes on the heels of George Bush granting co-control over U.S troops and contractors to a shaky Iraqi government. What happened to an administration that disdained the UN, for example, even appointing a US ambassador who openly stated the UN should be disbanded and the US should not pay its dues? This is the most hypocritical group of people who ever walked the face of the earth!”

Related Web Resources:

Roadmap for the Potential Use of Financial Statements Prepared in Accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards by U.S. Issuers, November 14, 2008, (PDF)

Submit Comments on File No. S7-27-08
Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In a unanimous vote, the Securities and Exchange Commission agreed to adopt rule amendments to improve mutual fund disclosures. This includes letting investors receive a summary prospectus written in simple English. The SEC also adopted revisions to the mutual funds’ registration form known as form N-1A, including amendments that let exchange-traded funds use summary prospectuses.

Summary Prospectus

The summary prospectuses, which are voluntary, may include important information about investment strategies and goals, past fund performance, risks, and fees. As long as the statutory prospectus, summary prospectus, and other essential data can be accessed online, mutual funds that send investors a summary prospectus will be fulfilling their prospectus delivery requirements. Key data, such as selling and buying procedures, financial intermediary compensation, and tax consequences must also be included. The SEC expects approximately 75% of all mutual funds to use summary prospectuses.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

A hedge fund manager has settled Securities and Exchange Commission charges that he misrepresented Pinnacle West, LLC and Sunquest Development, LLC as sound investments and, as a result, defrauded investors of almost $20 million. Mark Joseph Peterson Boucher will pay a $100,000 civil fine and will be barred from giving investment advice for five years. He also agreed to a permanent injunction from antifraud violations in the future.

Per the SEC’s complaint, the San Francisco-based hedge fund manager told clients that the real estate development companies did not have much debt and owned viable real property when, in fact, one of the companies did not own any property and the other company owned one property and had debts that exceeded potential profits. Along with the companies’ owners, Boucher was accused of using the invested funds for personal purposes. He is not agreeing to or denying the allegations by settling.

The SEC says that even though Boucher was not a registered investment adviser, he charged a fee to give clients advice. He is the author of the book The Hedge Fund on investing and the SEC says that he recommended the companies to clients in a newsletter that he owns.

Gary Paul Johnson, who owns 20% of Sunquest Development stock, also settled antifraud allegations. As part of his agreement with the SEC, Johnson will pay a $120,000 civil penalty, disgorge over $1.8 million in ill-gotten gains and about $700,000 in pre-judgment interest. Defendant and primary Pinnacle West owner John Earl Brake has not yet reached a settlement with the SEC.

SEC Charges Bay Area Investment Adviser, Others in Real Estate Investment Scam, SEC, August 27, 2008
Read the SEC Complaint (PDF)
Continue Reading ›

Contact Information
Contact us for information on our fees. Main Office
1010 Lamar St #900
Houston, TX 77002
Phone: (713) 227-2400 Fax: (713) 583-1217 Toll Free: (800) 259-9010
Contact us for information on our fees. Western Colorado
241 S Elizabeth St #500
Ridgway, CO 81432
Phone: (970) 239-7085
Contact us for information on our fees. Denver
1700 Lincoln St #2710
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (720) 439-2827
Contact us for information on our fees. Portland
621 SW Morrison St #1050-B
Portland, OR 97205
Phone: (971) 285-3075
Contact us for information on our fees. Gulfport
2118 18th St #100
Gulfport, MS 39501
Phone: (228) 206-2493
Contact us for information on our fees. Tampa
407 N Howard Ave #201A
Tampa, FL 33606
Phone: (813) 560-2992
Contact us for information on our fees. San Diego
1545 Hotel Cir S #150-1
San Diego, CA 92108
Phone: (619) 550-4847
Contact us for information on our fees. Chicago
141 W Jackson Blvd #3550A
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 462-4176
Contact us for information on our fees. Buffalo Sheridan Meadows Corporate Park South
6225 Sheridan Dr #308-B
Buffalo, NY 14221
Phone: (716) 261-3529
Contact us for information on our fees. Dallas Founders Square
900 Jackson St #440-A
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: (214) 613-5306
Contact us for information on our fees. New Orleans Lakeway Two
3850 N Causeway Blvd #200-B
Metairie, LA 70002
Phone: (504) 324-0252
Contact us for information on our fees. Lexington
216 E Reynolds Rd #C
Lexington, KY 40517
Phone: (859) 810-0266
Contact us for information on our fees. San Francisco
1 Embarcadero Ctr #500
San Francisco, CA 94111
Phone: (415) 287-0877

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

We serve the following localities: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas–Fort Worth, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Bernardino-Riverside, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, St. Louis, Tampa–St. Petersburg, and Washington, D.C. View More

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design