Phone
(888) 303-8755
 

FINRA Sticks to Securities

by Bob Seawright on August 23, 2010

Categories: FINRA Regulation Suitability | 3 Comments

Bob Seawright

Bob Seawright

LinkedIn
Connect with Bob on LinkedIn. Go

Bob’s Recent Posts

View all Bob’s past articles…
Subscribe Subscribe to the AMS Blog

FINRA was created by the merger of the National Association of Securities Dealers and the enforcement arm of the New York Stock Exchange in 2007. As a consequence, FINRA has been updating and combining the organizations’ rules on a section-by-section basis.

As part of this process, the Securities and Exchange Commission has published a notice of the filing of proposed FINRA Rule 2111, which governs suitability, and FINRA Rule 2090, the “know your customer” rule, in the Federal Register last week. This process is a precursor to allowing these new rules to “go live.” The SEC can take from 45-90 days to decide whether to approve the rules as is or to hold further proceedings. Public comments are due September 9.

Most significantly for our purposes, FINRA is leaving non-securities products out of the proposed rule updates. Because the SEC classifies variable insurance products as securities, FINRA has jurisdiction over the individuals and organizations that sell those products. The new proposed “know your customer” rule is based upon NYSE 405(1), and it creates an obligation for broker-dealers to use “due diligence” when they open and maintain customer accounts, and to “know the essential facts concerning every customer.” This proposed rule would eliminate the current NYSE Rule 405(1) requirement that broker-dealers learn the essential facts relative to every order.

The proposed suitability rule, FINRA Rule 2111, would require a broker-dealer or associated person to have “a reasonable basis to believe that a recommended transaction or investment strategy involving a security or securities is suitable for the customer.” This assessment must be “based on the information obtained through the reasonable diligence of the member or associated person to ascertain the customer’s investment profile, including, but not limited to, the customer’s age, other investments, financial situation and needs, tax status, investment objectives, investment experience, investment time horizon, liquidity needs, risk tolerance, and any other information the customer may disclose to the member or associated person in connection with such recommendation.”

FINRA had been considering whether it ought to apply the suitability rule to members’ sales of non-securities products, such as insurance. But many insurer groups, producer groups and regulators advised FINRA that it should not. “This issue generated the greatest number of comments, most of which were against extending the rule’s reach,” FINRA officials reported.

The vast majority of commenters argued that FINRA does not have jurisdiction over non-securities products. Some asserted that FINRA has no expertise in regulating non-securities products, and some pointed out that other regulatory agencies and self-regulatory groups already regulate products such as insurance.

“FINRA does not agree with the commenters’ reasoning against extending the scope of the suitability rule,” FINRA officials said. “FINRA acknowledges, however, that future developments in regulatory restructuring could impact any such proposal. FINRA emphasizes, moreover, that the proposed new suitability rule (including the explicit coverage of recommended strategies and expanded list of the types of information that members must seek to gather and analyze) and the proposed ‘Know Your Customer’ rule together provide enhanced protection to investors. Consequently, FINRA will not include explicit references to nonsecurities products in the rule at this time.”

3 Comments

re: FINRA Sticks to Securities

Tuesday, December 14, 2010 6:27:53 PM Tom Glass

 I sold a universal life product to a customer. The bank draft authorization had two places for the client to sign. He signed one place and went out of the country. He gave me permission to sign line 2. He then got cold feet and called the company. I was fired by the company, FINRA got involved, sent me a letter of caution. The company stated on my U5 that I had signed the bank draft authorization. After 26 years in this industry, I cannot get a job. The client kept the life insurance.


re: FINRA Sticks to Securities

Friday, September 03, 2010 3:41:33 PM Bob Seawright

"It sounds like you are endorsing AMS agents to be turned loose on the public selling insurance products without knowing the customer."

If that's how it sounds to you, you didn't read what I wrote very carefully.  In this post, I merely reported what has happened in this regard to this point.  That said, if you had read what I have repeatedly written on this general subject (for example, here), you would have seen that I endorse the NAIC's Suitability Model, which already requires that an insurance producer ascertain an annuity's suitability prior to sale.  In that regard, the insurance producer must make all reasonable efforts to obtain information concerning: (1) the consumer’s financial status; (2) the consumer’s tax status; (3) the consumer’s investment objectives; and (4) any other information used or considered to be reasonable in making the recommendation to the consumer.

"How can you justify selling annuities and other insurance products to a client with out [sic] having an understanding of the clients [sic] needs, risk tolerance, and liquidity needs." 

I don't.  Moreover, existing insurance suitability rules already require that a producer know his or her client.

"Life agents need to be held more accountable for their actions."

All financial services professions need to be held to extremely high standards.  I was securities-licensed long before I earned my insurance license, and in my experience, your suggestion that insurance producers have lower standards is false.

"We are constantly running into AMS agents selling EIA's [sic] to elderly clients without proper planning."

Somehow I suspect that this charge is much more about "sour grapes" and your loss of business than about your sincere concern for the elderly.

"I urge you reconsider your opinion and urge your agents to follow the FINRA rule 2111 in order to properly [sic] help the client."

I urge you to do some homework and recognize that the substantive requirements of Rule 2111 are already placed upon insurance producers by way of the NAIC's Suitability Model.  And since most of our producers are securities licensed as well as insurance licensed, their securities business is already governed by the securities industry's "Know Your Customer" rule.


re: FINRA Sticks to Securities

Friday, September 03, 2010 2:52:23 PM Jeff Quick

It sounds like you are endorsing AMS agents to be turned loose on the public selling insurance products without knowing the customer.  How can you justify selling annuities and other insurance products to a client with out having an understanding of the clients needs, risk tolerance, and liquidity needs.  Life agents need to be held more accountable for their actions.  We are constantly running into AMS agents selling EIA's to elderly clients without proper planning.  Slamming the entire portfolio into a product for the sake of a high commission is not only unethical but extremely inappropriate. I urge you reconsider your opinion and urge your agents to follow the FINRA rule 2111 in order to properly help the client.


Post a Comment