Dan Brecher
Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.comFirm Insights
“Finders” Acting As a Securities Broker-Dealer Are on the SEC’s Hit List
Author: Dan Brecher
Date: September 11, 2015
Key Contacts
Back
The Securities and Exchange Commission has been moving more aggressively to state the types of activities that will result in a determination that a “finder” is acting as a securities broker-dealer.
The SEC is also focusing on securities broker-dealer issues in its OCIE compliance exams of private investment funds, and has recently instituted a significant enforcement action against a fund manager. Not surprisingly, the uptick in enforcement coincides with the use of general solicitation and general advertising in Rule 506 private offerings permitted by the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act.
There are serious legal issues to be considered when a start-up company or private investment fund uses its own employees or other third party “finders” to identify and solicit investors to provide capital via a private securities offering. In many cases, these individuals perform activities that require registration with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and SEC.
Who is required to register as a broker-dealer?
The Exchange Act prohibits a person from engaging in the business of effecting transactions in securities without a license. As set forth in SEC guidance, registration as a broker-dealer is generally required if a person (1) actively solicited investors, (2) advised investors as to the merits of an investment, (3) regularly participated in securities transactions, and (4) received commissions or transaction-based remuneration. If the SEC finds that an individual satisfies any of the above factors, registration may be required. Accordingly, true “finders” can generally do little more than make introductions in exchange for a fee. For issuers, that means contracts must be structured so that the finder gets paid regardless of whether or not any securities are sold. That would go a long way toward satisfying regulators that the issuer was not participating in a violation.
Are there any exemptions to registration as a securities broker-dealer?
Of course, as with most securities laws and regulations, there are a number of exemptions. Most notably, the JOBS Act contains an exception from broker registration for intermediaries assisting in securities offerings exempt under Rule 506 of Regulation D. The narrow exemption applies to online intermediaries used in connection with Rule 506 offerings. To qualify for the exemption, the “finder” must (1) maintain a platform or mechanism that permits the offer, sale, purchase, negotiation, general solicitations, general advertisements, or similar activities by issuers, whether online, in person, or through other means, (2) co-invest in the offering, or (3) provide ancillary services with respect to the offering.
The exemption further requires that online platforms (1) may not receive any compensation in connection with the purchase or sale of the security; (2) may not have possession of customer funds or securities in connection with the purchase or sale of the security; and (3) may not receive separate compensation in connection with providing investment advice to issuers or investors.
What penalties do issuers face in using unregistered brokers to raise capital?
While there are legal pitfalls for securities issuers who utilize unregistered “finders” to solicit investors, that practice continues, with issuers, “finders” and brokers acting unknowingly outside the law, or purposely seeking to act under the radar. It is, of course, preferable that they educate themselves about exemptions that are available and act accordingly. One good reason to get educated about the exemptions, and comply with them, is that an unhappy investor may seek resolution, by lawsuit or complaint to a regulatory body (SEC, FINRA, State Blue Sky regulator), the radar can be aroused and the regulators may take a look. While the remedy of rescission (return of the investment) may be sufficient in some instances where a violation has occurred, that might not put an end to the matter for the regulators who may seek to flex their muscles and make an example of the violation, so as to discourage others from engaging in such violations. Regulators can seek injunctive relief whether or not the issuer has already granted rescission to investors. Regulators can become aware of the violations through investor-brought court proceedings, and investors, relying on regulators’ actions, can proceed in court seeking remedies readily available to them for securities violations.
Using an unregistered broker to find funding presents a higher degree of risk for issuers in Rule 506 private offerings, including aiding and abetting liability under federal securities laws, which raises the risk of rescission being directed under state securities laws. We have advised numerous issuers on how to properly inter-act with finders. If you have any questions about this issue, or would like assistance with your legal work, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
- Locations: New York City
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
“Finders” Acting As a Securities Broker-Dealer Are on the SEC’s Hit List
Author: Dan Brecher
The Securities and Exchange Commission has been moving more aggressively to state the types of activities that will result in a determination that a “finder” is acting as a securities broker-dealer.
The SEC is also focusing on securities broker-dealer issues in its OCIE compliance exams of private investment funds, and has recently instituted a significant enforcement action against a fund manager. Not surprisingly, the uptick in enforcement coincides with the use of general solicitation and general advertising in Rule 506 private offerings permitted by the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act.
There are serious legal issues to be considered when a start-up company or private investment fund uses its own employees or other third party “finders” to identify and solicit investors to provide capital via a private securities offering. In many cases, these individuals perform activities that require registration with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and SEC.
Who is required to register as a broker-dealer?
The Exchange Act prohibits a person from engaging in the business of effecting transactions in securities without a license. As set forth in SEC guidance, registration as a broker-dealer is generally required if a person (1) actively solicited investors, (2) advised investors as to the merits of an investment, (3) regularly participated in securities transactions, and (4) received commissions or transaction-based remuneration. If the SEC finds that an individual satisfies any of the above factors, registration may be required. Accordingly, true “finders” can generally do little more than make introductions in exchange for a fee. For issuers, that means contracts must be structured so that the finder gets paid regardless of whether or not any securities are sold. That would go a long way toward satisfying regulators that the issuer was not participating in a violation.
Are there any exemptions to registration as a securities broker-dealer?
Of course, as with most securities laws and regulations, there are a number of exemptions. Most notably, the JOBS Act contains an exception from broker registration for intermediaries assisting in securities offerings exempt under Rule 506 of Regulation D. The narrow exemption applies to online intermediaries used in connection with Rule 506 offerings. To qualify for the exemption, the “finder” must (1) maintain a platform or mechanism that permits the offer, sale, purchase, negotiation, general solicitations, general advertisements, or similar activities by issuers, whether online, in person, or through other means, (2) co-invest in the offering, or (3) provide ancillary services with respect to the offering.
The exemption further requires that online platforms (1) may not receive any compensation in connection with the purchase or sale of the security; (2) may not have possession of customer funds or securities in connection with the purchase or sale of the security; and (3) may not receive separate compensation in connection with providing investment advice to issuers or investors.
What penalties do issuers face in using unregistered brokers to raise capital?
While there are legal pitfalls for securities issuers who utilize unregistered “finders” to solicit investors, that practice continues, with issuers, “finders” and brokers acting unknowingly outside the law, or purposely seeking to act under the radar. It is, of course, preferable that they educate themselves about exemptions that are available and act accordingly. One good reason to get educated about the exemptions, and comply with them, is that an unhappy investor may seek resolution, by lawsuit or complaint to a regulatory body (SEC, FINRA, State Blue Sky regulator), the radar can be aroused and the regulators may take a look. While the remedy of rescission (return of the investment) may be sufficient in some instances where a violation has occurred, that might not put an end to the matter for the regulators who may seek to flex their muscles and make an example of the violation, so as to discourage others from engaging in such violations. Regulators can seek injunctive relief whether or not the issuer has already granted rescission to investors. Regulators can become aware of the violations through investor-brought court proceedings, and investors, relying on regulators’ actions, can proceed in court seeking remedies readily available to them for securities violations.
Using an unregistered broker to find funding presents a higher degree of risk for issuers in Rule 506 private offerings, including aiding and abetting liability under federal securities laws, which raises the risk of rescission being directed under state securities laws. We have advised numerous issuers on how to properly inter-act with finders. If you have any questions about this issue, or would like assistance with your legal work, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.