GUIDANCE
Trading Activity Fee
SUGGESTED ROUTING
KEY TOPICS
Legal & Compliance
Operations Managers
Senior Management
Options Exemption
Trading Activity Fee
Discussion In 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved amendments to the NASD By-Laws establishing a Trading Activity Fee (TAF).1 Among the covered securities excluded from the TAF are
This is completely unacceptable. If I as an investor decide to take a calculated risk based on my research, that is my decision to make. There shouldn't be any hindrances on how I invest my capital since I am assuming the risk. This rule effectively decides the investor's risk tolerance for them.
SUGGESTED ROUTING
Senior Management
Internal Audit
Legal & Compliance
Operations
Systems
Executive Summary
On November 3, 1998, the Securitiesand Exchange Commission (SEC)issued a No-Action Letter to clarify itsposition under SEC Rule 15c3-1 (NetCapital Rule) regarding the
TO: All NASD Members and Other Interested Persons
SUMMARY
Recently, in response to a request by the Association, the staff of the SEC's Division of Market Regulation issued a no-action letter concerning 17 C.F.R. 240.15c3-l (the "net capital rule") and 17 C.F.R. 240.15c3-3 (the "customer protection rule"). The letter provides, until December 31, 1983, a temporary
There should not be any new restrictions on the purchase of "complex" investments. In my experience the use of professional asset managers have cost my family money the two times we used them. I am perfectly capable of choosing the type of investments that work for my situation. For your information for every dollar I have lost on my inverse fund I made 9 on my other investments
FINRA, Please do not consider further regulations. I have a much broader knowledge of my investment goals than government regulators. Many of these investments are crucial to my overall investment strategy. Thank you, but I believe I am much more capable than regulators who may never have invested in these asset classes. PLEASE don't leave the average investor out of these strategies. Why
I am opposed to limits/tests/net worth qualifications on inverse or leveraged ETFs. I use them as a hedge on a portfolio of stocks to protect from market downturns and I think everyone should have that option. It should be the investors choice. Investors already can buy individual stocks and many of them are down over 50% as well so it's not like people can't lose money the
I see no reason I should be restricted from making money / profits from leveraged products as an individual investor. As an individual investor I want the ability to invest as I please without burdensome and frankly unnecessary impositions by regulators or obtaining the blessing of the provider of my brokerage account. While I could support limited net worth requirements I believe no one who
Inverse and leveraged ETF's provide a valuable vehicle for knowledgeable investors. Eliminating these products does not make the investment landscape any safer. On the contrary, limiting these investment options will reduce the ability of investors to hedge or make profits from falling asset prices. I do not want, or need, some government dork to protect me from myself. Please make
Please, do not take away my freedom to choose how to invest my money. Also, please, do not forget we are in America, and we should not start restricting peoples freedom like China, Russia, and even the European Union. If there is a problem with the education people have when investing in these types of assets, then let's improve that! Taking away freedoms does not resolve the problem!
