Portfolio Resources Group, Inc. Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
ANTONIO CAMEJO
N/A
Portfolio Resources Group, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to comment on Regulatory Notice 22-08 published by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). We support FINRAs investor protection mission and commend FINRA for reminding members of their current regulatory obligations. However, we are deeply concerned that FINRA is considering a series of radical and unprecedented regulations that could prevent or deter our clients from accessing a broad range of public securities deemed complex. If adopted, these regulations would upend our long-standing disclosure-based regulatory system and interfere with financial professionals ability to choose investments that are right for our clients. These regulations could hurt our clients by depriving them of access to valuable investments for their portfolios, be costly to implement, and impose substantial additional and unnecessary compliance burdens. We therefore strongly urge FINRA not to adopt any of the measures set forth in the Notice. FINRA's POTENTIAL REGULATIONS WOULD UPEND OUR DISCLOSURE-BASED REGULATORY SYSTEM For almost 90 years, Americas successful securities laws have been based on providing accurate disclosures, not regulators picking and choosing who can invest in what securities. FINRAs proposed regulations are at odds with this system which gives financial professionals the freedom to choose investments that are right for their clients and for investors to make their own investment decisions. Public securities should be available to all, not just millionaires. Regulations that deny or impose restrictions or limits on the right to buy public securities are contrary to our disclosure-based system. FINRA is not a merit regulator and should not be deciding which public securities we can recommend to our clients or interfere with their ability to buy the public securities they deem in their best interest. FINRAs POTENTIAL REGULATIONS COULD HARM OUR CLIENTS FINRAs measures could apply to dozens of popular securities that provide important benefits to our clients and other investors, benefits available to millionaires, including portfolio diversification and protection from downside risk. They could restrict investor choice and access to valuable investments that could help our clients achieve long-term financial goals. Restricting clients from investing their own money as they see fit is not a proper role for government or regulators. Neither government nor regulators have a monopoly on wisdom. On the contrary, government policy makers have a demonstrable track record of financial mismanagement of public funds. Pretending to tell clients how best to invest their own money is a step too far. It must be left up to the client to review options, and then decide what is in their own best interest. Brokers should not be required to put clients through special processes like passing a test, sitting out cooling off periods or demonstrating net worth before they are permitted to invest in public securities. It is our job to understand the securities that we recommend. Testing and net worth standards can be subjective, biased, and discriminatory and could unfairly disadvantage our clients. FINRAs POTENTIAL REGULATIONS ARE UNNECESSARY The Notice doesnt actually put forth any evidence to justify the extreme measures it is considering or explain why problems, to the extent they exist, are not adequately addressed by Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) and other applicable laws and regulations. Reg BI, along with other regulations and guidance, is sufficient to protect investors acting on recommendations. Moreover, FINRA has not identified evidence that investors misunderstand complex products. FINRAs POTENTIAL REGULATIONS COULD ADD SIGNIFICANT COSTS TO OUR BUSINESS OPERATIONS This Notice contemplates adding an additional and unnecessary layer of regulation just a few years after the adoption of Reg BI. In addition, the vague and arbitrary standards in the Notice, if adopted, would be open to second-guessing from regulators and investors, which would likely increase our regulatory, reputational, and litigation risk, and incentivize some firms to eliminate complex products from their platforms. The testing and other measures contemplated by the Notice could be enormously expensive and difficult to develop and administer. Lack of uniform testing standards would exacerbate these issues. The additional administrative and compliance would likely be particularly burdensome for smaller firms. CONCLUSION For the reasons above, we strongly urge FINRA to reconsider the proposed regulations discussed in the Notice. FINRA should not be a merit regulator determining what securities people can buy or who can buy them.
For the Public
FINRA DATA
FINRA Data provides non-commercial use of data, specifically the ability to save data views and create and manage a Bond Watchlist.
For Industry Professionals
FINPRO
Registered representatives can fulfill Continuing Education requirements, view their industry CRD record and perform other compliance tasks.
For Member Firms
FINRA GATEWAY
Firm compliance professionals can access filings and requests, run reports and submit support tickets.
For Case Participants
DR PORTAL
Arbitration and mediation case participants and FINRA neutrals can view case information and submit documents through this Dispute Resolution Portal.
Need Help? | Check System Status
Log In to other FINRA systems
Portfolio Resources Group, Inc. Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
Portfolio Resources Group, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to comment on Regulatory Notice 22-08 published by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). We support FINRAs investor protection mission and commend FINRA for reminding members of their current regulatory obligations. However, we are deeply concerned that FINRA is considering a series of radical and unprecedented regulations that could prevent or deter our clients from accessing a broad range of public securities deemed complex. If adopted, these regulations would upend our long-standing disclosure-based regulatory system and interfere with financial professionals ability to choose investments that are right for our clients. These regulations could hurt our clients by depriving them of access to valuable investments for their portfolios, be costly to implement, and impose substantial additional and unnecessary compliance burdens. We therefore strongly urge FINRA not to adopt any of the measures set forth in the Notice. FINRA's POTENTIAL REGULATIONS WOULD UPEND OUR DISCLOSURE-BASED REGULATORY SYSTEM For almost 90 years, Americas successful securities laws have been based on providing accurate disclosures, not regulators picking and choosing who can invest in what securities. FINRAs proposed regulations are at odds with this system which gives financial professionals the freedom to choose investments that are right for their clients and for investors to make their own investment decisions. Public securities should be available to all, not just millionaires. Regulations that deny or impose restrictions or limits on the right to buy public securities are contrary to our disclosure-based system. FINRA is not a merit regulator and should not be deciding which public securities we can recommend to our clients or interfere with their ability to buy the public securities they deem in their best interest. FINRAs POTENTIAL REGULATIONS COULD HARM OUR CLIENTS FINRAs measures could apply to dozens of popular securities that provide important benefits to our clients and other investors, benefits available to millionaires, including portfolio diversification and protection from downside risk. They could restrict investor choice and access to valuable investments that could help our clients achieve long-term financial goals. Restricting clients from investing their own money as they see fit is not a proper role for government or regulators. Neither government nor regulators have a monopoly on wisdom. On the contrary, government policy makers have a demonstrable track record of financial mismanagement of public funds. Pretending to tell clients how best to invest their own money is a step too far. It must be left up to the client to review options, and then decide what is in their own best interest. Brokers should not be required to put clients through special processes like passing a test, sitting out cooling off periods or demonstrating net worth before they are permitted to invest in public securities. It is our job to understand the securities that we recommend. Testing and net worth standards can be subjective, biased, and discriminatory and could unfairly disadvantage our clients. FINRAs POTENTIAL REGULATIONS ARE UNNECESSARY The Notice doesnt actually put forth any evidence to justify the extreme measures it is considering or explain why problems, to the extent they exist, are not adequately addressed by Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) and other applicable laws and regulations. Reg BI, along with other regulations and guidance, is sufficient to protect investors acting on recommendations. Moreover, FINRA has not identified evidence that investors misunderstand complex products. FINRAs POTENTIAL REGULATIONS COULD ADD SIGNIFICANT COSTS TO OUR BUSINESS OPERATIONS This Notice contemplates adding an additional and unnecessary layer of regulation just a few years after the adoption of Reg BI. In addition, the vague and arbitrary standards in the Notice, if adopted, would be open to second-guessing from regulators and investors, which would likely increase our regulatory, reputational, and litigation risk, and incentivize some firms to eliminate complex products from their platforms. The testing and other measures contemplated by the Notice could be enormously expensive and difficult to develop and administer. Lack of uniform testing standards would exacerbate these issues. The additional administrative and compliance would likely be particularly burdensome for smaller firms. CONCLUSION For the reasons above, we strongly urge FINRA to reconsider the proposed regulations discussed in the Notice. FINRA should not be a merit regulator determining what securities people can buy or who can buy them.