
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.

Director and officer liability increases sharply when a company is in financial distress. Decisions that would draw little attention in a healthy business can later be challenged by creditors, shareholders, bankruptcy trustees, and regulators as breaches of fiduciary duty, fraudulent transfers, or oversight failures. Understanding where that exposure comes from, and how to manage it, […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For developers pursuing battery energy storage system (BESS) projects, finding the right property is only the beginning. BESS site selection is as much a legal and transactional exercise as a real estate decision, with risk analysis central to the project’s ultimate success. Key Takeaways The core questions for BESS site selection in New York and […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

Arbitration resolves disputes privately before an arbitrator whose decision is usually final, while litigation resolves them in court with full rights of appeal. Whether a business ends up in arbitration or litigation is often decided when it signs the contract, long before any dispute arises. Key Takeaways When facing a contract dispute, carefully consider your […]
Author: Graham Staton

Can you own part of a business in New Jersey without a written agreement? Yes, it is possible. Under New Jersey’s Uniform Partnership Act, a partnership can arise when two or more people carry on a business as co-owners for profit, whether or not they ever intended to form one. Ownership doesn’t necessarily depend on […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
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!