Displaying items by tag: reg bi

Skience, a leading financial services solution and consulting provider, recently announced an integration with CapitalROCK’s RightBRIDGE Best Interest Validation System. Skience offers consulting services and an award-winning platform that provides wealth management firms and RIAs with an efficient way to unify their technology. CapitalROCK, the makers of RightBRIDGE, provides financial services firms with a powerful and configurable rules engine to determine and document the best interest status of proposed rollovers, account types, and products. RightBRIDGE uses a scoring engine and ReasonText™ that explains why a recommendation fits a client’s needs and the licensing firm’s best interest requirements. By adding this integration, Skience will be able to provide advisors with an easy way to integrate Regulation Best Interest into their workflow process with a click of a button. The data can be used to update Skience records and be leveraged by Skience’s suitability checks as Skience’s client and household data will be prefilled into RightBRIDGE. The announcement comes as Robert Cook, FINRA Chief recently noted that more Reg BI-related enforcement cases are in the pipeline.

Finsum:Financial services platform Skience announced that it will be integrating with CapitalROCK’s RightBRIDGE solution that helps advisors meet Reg BI standards.

See the badge, mister? Shiny, huh? Smudges? Please.

Yep; the sheriff’s in town. At the recent 2022 PLANADVISER National Conference, the ongoing enforcement of the Regulation Best Interest package was a hot topic among SEC speakers, according to -planadvisder.com. The package now is fully enforced. But the subject had plenty of company; other SEC regulatory efforts -- including proposed regulations concerning money market funds, ESG investments and cybersecurity – also were addressed.

The SEC’s updated interpretation of the fiduciary duty as prescribed by the Investment Advisers Act was in total effect as well.

Now, when the law speaks, of course, listening up’s highly recommended. Here, for instance: upon passing a recommendation to a retail customer, brokerage professionals are required to act in a retail customer’s best interest. Putting their own financial or other interest ahead of the retail customer’s interests? Yep: a no no for those professionals.

For more than the past year, Reg. Bi and Form CRS compliance have been in the crosshairs of FINRA and the SEC. That included the maiden SEC Reg. Bi settlement, which occurred in June, according to goodwinlaw.com.

The resounding takeaway from a recent FINRA conference call is that the regulatory body is taking a “no one-size-fits-all” approach to Reg BI compliance. FINRA explained that it is moving away from good faith efforts reviews and into “deeper dives” on how firms comply with Form CRS and the Reg. BI Care, Compliance, Disclosure, and Conflicts of Interest obligations. The conference call focused on FINRA’s expectations during exams and the types of violations that its exam teams will refer to their enforcement colleagues. FINRA mentioned several common violations that it will refer to its Department of Enforcement, including the failure to recognize the applicability of Reg BI and Form CRS deficiencies related to incorrectly answering the disciplinary history question. It also indicated that firms that were previously cited for Reg BI CRS deficiencies, and made no efforts to correct findings, are more likely to be referred to Enforcement. The overall message for firms is that they should document the steps they have taken to further Reg. BI and Form CRS compliance. This could be the difference between an exam deficiency or an enforcement action.

Finsum: In a recent conference call, FINRA’s explained that there is no one size fits all approach to Reg BI compliance and firms shoulddocument the steps they have taken to make sure they’re compliant.

FINRA has issued its first disciplinary action related to Reg BI. The regulatory authority levied a $5,000 fine and a six-month suspension on a broker for allegedly causing their client to pay tens of thousands in commissions on an account of less than $30,000. It is the first time FINRA has taken action against a broker for alleged violations of the SEC's Reg-BI fiduciary rule. Charles V. Malico, who worked for Network 1 Financial Securities at the time of the violation, accepted and consented to the agency’s findings without admission or denial. According to findings, between July 2020 and November 2021, Malico violated Reg BI when he recommended a series of trades in the account of a retail client that was considered excessive based on the customer’s investment profile. Therefore, his actions were not in the client’s best interest. Making matters worse, Malico allegedly recommended that his client buy and sell a security, only to repurchase the same security days or weeks later. FINRA was made aware of the broker’s conduct through a review of a customer-initiated arbitration. The arbitration, which is still pending, stemmed from a Dec. 6, 2021 customer complaint that alleged negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligent supervision. 

Finsum: In its first disciplinary action related to Reg BI, FINRA levied a $5,000 fine and a six-month suspension on a broker for not acting in the best interests of his client.

The advent of digital advice has not only made investing easier but has also allowed client interactions to become more seamless. With more client interactions moving online, do online content and advice still put a client's best interest first? That’s a question the SEC, industry lawyers, and other regulators are contemplating. While online firms such as Robinhood came under scrutiny for gamifying investor behavior, something as simple as an investment calculator on an advisor website can be construed as a recommendation. Last August, the SEC issued a request for comment about broker-dealers’ and investment advisors’ digital engagement practices. Keith Kessel, a senior principal consultant at ACA Group, told Financial Advisor IQ that the SEC “is trying to ascertain in what set of scenarios would a recommendation or solicitation exist versus what are those engagement practices that are outside of the purview of the scope of the solicitation of the suitability rule and/or Regulation Best Interest regulation duty as such.” He also noted that the SEC’s request for comment “emphasizes the regulator’s concern about the blurring of the lines between engagement and advice.”

Finsum: As more client interactions occur online, the SEC is trying to determine what constitutes advice and what constitutes engagement.