
Dan Brecher
Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.com
Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.comLegal issues can arise 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 the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC).

Using an unregistered person or entity to find funding creates risk for issuers in securities offerings, including aiding and abetting liability for violating federal or state securities laws. Investors can seek the return of their invested funds via claims for rescission.
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” should not do more than make introductions in exchange for a fee. For issuers, that means contracts should be structured so that the finder gets paid regardless of whether or not any securities are sold.
Of course, as with many securities laws, there are a number of exemptions. Most notably, the JOBS Act contains an exception from broker registration for a distinct class of intermediaries assisting in securities offerings who are exempt under Rule 506 of Regulation D. This 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, and (3) provide ancillary services with respect to the offering.
This exemption further requires that the online platform (1) may not receive any compensation in connection the purchase or sale of the security; and (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 the issuers or to investors.
While there are legal pitfalls for securities issuers who utilize unregistered “finders” to solicit investors, that practice continues, with issuers, “finders” and brokers seeking to act, knowing or unknowing, under the radar. However, should an unhappy investor 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, whether or not rescission is granted by the issuer in a settlement, or ordered by a court.
Issuers and unregistered finders are not the only ones subject to legal pitfalls here. The SEC is increasingly aggressive in bringing enforcement actions and imposing sanctions on private equity firms, fund managers and brokerage firms who aid or abet finders’ violations of broker-dealer registration requirements. The SEC also looks at unregistered broker-dealer issues in its compliance exams of private investment funds. While there is SEC guidance available from no-action letters, rules and interpretations for brokers, investment platforms and crowdfunding, there is not sufficient public awareness of issues involving unregistered finders. Further regulatory actions and pronouncements can be anticipated.
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Dan Brecher, at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

In New Jersey, an irrevocable trust can sometimes be modified even though its name suggests otherwise, and one of the primary tools for doing so is a process called decanting. Whether decanting is available depends on the specific terms of the trust and the discretion given to the trustee. Key takeaways: New Jersey has no […]
Author: Marc J. Comer

Intellectual property valuation determines the monetary value of a business’s IP assets, and it drives outcomes in licensing deals, joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions, financing, and ownership disputes. The most valuable assets of a business are often the things that cannot be seen or touched: a proprietary process, a copyrighted work, brand recognition, or the […]
Author: Jay McDaniel

For New Jersey data center owners and operators, a service agreement may look routine when it is signed. The network is functioning, the vendor is meeting its installation schedule, and the parties have agreed on pricing and performance specifications. The provisions that seem most important at that stage are often the technical ones. That changes […]
Author: George McGowan

The Fort Monmouth redevelopment has entered its execution phase, and it is repositioning the broader Monmouth County real estate market. When Netflix and the Fort Monmouth Economic Revitalization Authority closed on the 292-acre Mega Parcel in December 2025, the transaction did more than hand over a deed. It marked the moment Fort Monmouth stopped being […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe

Owning a residential rental property in New Jersey involves more than finding tenants and collecting rent. Property owners must comply with a combination of state laws, municipal ordinances, building and housing codes, and zoning and land use regulations. These requirements can affect everything from the number of dwelling units permitted at a property to whether […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe

The five most common real estate disputes are breach of contract claims, landlord-tenant conflicts, zoning and land use disagreements, construction claims, and boundary disputes. Understanding why each arises, and taking preventive steps early, can help property owners, tenants, developers, and investors avoid costly litigation. Key Takeaways: Real estate transactions are complex endeavors involving numerous parties […]
Author: Paul Grossman
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
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.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!