Exemptive Letter to Venu Palaparthi, NPM Securities LLC
SUGGESTED ROUTING*
Senior Management Government SecuritiesLegal & Compliance OperationsTrading
*These are suggested departments only. Others may be appropriate for your firm.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 2, 1988, the Securities and Exchange Commission approved amendments to the NASD By-Laws and Rules of Fair practice and new Government Securities Rules designed to permit the NASD
IMPORTANT MAIL VOTE
OFFICERS, PARTNERS, PROPRIETORS
TO: All NASD Members
LAST VOTING DATE IS FEBRUARY 4, 1988.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NASD members are invited to vote on proposed amendments to the NASD By-Laws and Rules of Fair Practice, and on proposed new government securities rules designed to permit the NASD to carry out its regulatory responsibilities under the Government Securities Act of 1986
No enhancements to current rules are required. It is the responsibility of the individual investor to educate him/her self on the advantages and disadvantages (AKA risks) of using these investment instruments. Claiming to be "confused" after incurring a loss is disingenuous and should not be considered a legitimate excuse unless the individual can prove that he/she was misled by an
I am opposed to the implementation of this rule. I am a small scale, non-pro investor and these type of ETFs come in handy when I believe I have determined the direction of a given market. Like ALL investment vehicles, there are risks involved. But to make requirements for participation restrictive to certain accounts is just absurd to me.
I oppose restrictions on the public's right to trade "complex" investments. I use leverage and inverse funds on a daily basis in my investment strategies. They are not hard for the average investor to understand. Adding red tape and complexity around these instruments is not in the investing public's best interests. I request that you reject these proposed rules.
There are plenty of warnings regarding the use of leverage with stock market investing. As a manager and individual investor, the disclosure and disclaimer hoops are already plentiful. This issue is less significant than the investor confusion created by dual licensing of brokers as RIA reps and Series 7 agents. The BIC rules didn't reduce the confusion.
I oppose regulations that limit small investors ability to invest in leveraged and inverse funds. This is a basic principle of fairness. Should these vehicles only be available to high net worth individuals? There is enough special privilege already in the system that rigs the system against individual investors. This rule amounts to further theft.
Please accept this statement as my opposition to proposed SEC Rule #S7-24-15. I do not need a regulator to decide on my behalf what is deemed to be an appropriate investment. No regulator will ever be able to be as discerning as I am about what I should do with my own money. Sincerely, Matthew A. Lester
Proposed Rule Change Relating to TRACE Reporting and Dissemination of Transactions in Agency Pass-Through Mortgage-Backed Securities Traded in Specified Pool Transactions and SBA-Backed ABS Transactions
