For many years, FINRA has attempted in several settings to substitute objective criteria for subjective ones, to try and make things easier for itself, and to make things more consistent from district to district and from firm to firm. For instance, FINRA used to – and may still today – identify firms whose exam cycles
Hiring practices
FINRA’s New MAP Rules Put Customers’ Interests Ahead Of Everything, Including Logic
Two years ago, when it was just an ugly rule proposal, I blogged about FINRA’s intent to modify its MAP rules to “Incentivize Payment of Arbitration Awards.” Sadly, FINRA once again showed it spinelessness by pushing these rule amendments through, ignoring the concerns of its own member firms. They are now not just rule proposals,…
FINRA Knows Best – At Least According To FINRA – When It Comes To Hiring Decisions
I don’t know how many times I’ve written about FINRA’s efforts over the years to address “rogue brokers,” or what it refers to nowadays more politically correctly as “high-risk brokers.” It doesn’t really matter what blog post you read, or when I wrote it, as they all tell essentially the same story: FINRA is just…
Not So Naked And Not So Afraid: FINRA’s New Compensation Rule Does Not Require Brokers To Bare All (Financially) When Changing Firms
Two years ago, FINRA first proposed to the SEC a rule that would require brokers to disclose to clients not only when they receive compensation (including signing bonuses and other payments) to switch from one broker-dealer to another, but, worse, the amount of that compensation. The industry was seriously not pleased with the rule. FINRA,…
FINRA’s (Mostly) New Background Check Rule Goes Into Effect July 1
As everyone who studies FINRA’s Regulatory Notices is already well aware, two days from now, FINRA’s rule requiring background checks on prospective registered representatives goes into effect. A lot of what the new rule mandates is not new, but, as there are some things that clearly were not required before, it is worth taking a…