
Dan Brecher
Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Dan Brecher
Date: January 17, 2014

Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.comThe Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently released a letter outlining its regulatory and examination priorities for 2014. It should be considered “must read” material for all broker dealers.
Susan Axelrod, Executive Vice President, Regulatory Operations, said, “The purpose of this letter is to provide insight to the industry on specific areas of concern for our regulatory programs in the coming year. We encourage firms to use this guidance along with their own analysis to enhance their programs as we will be examining for strong controls and robust compliance efforts in these areas.”
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority letter addresses a wide range of issues, including business conduct, fraud, financial and operational concerns, and market regulation. Below are some of the highlights:
New to Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s exam priorities are so-called recidivist brokers, those who have a pattern of complaints or disclosures for sales practice abuses. The enhanced scrutiny means that firms should thoroughly investigate all new hires and have procedures in place for heightened supervision of brokers who may have questionable backgrounds. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority plans to use both its High Risk Broker initiative and its Broker Migration Model to focus its enforcement efforts.
In the wake of several high-profile data breaches impacting the financial industry, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority plans to assess the integrity of firms’ policies, procedures, and controls to protect sensitive customer data. Accordingly, firms should evaluate and test their current data protection procedures to detect and address any potential weaknesses.
As the market for initial public offerings (IPOs) continues to heat up, examiners will be keeping a close eye on firms entering the underwriting business or significantly expanding their activities in this area. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority specifically cites compliance with Rule 5131 which, among other things, prohibits quid pro quo allocations and “spinning,” and addresses the conduct of firms and associated persons in the areas of book-building, new issue pricing, penalty bids, trading and waivers of lock-up agreements, as primary concern.
Starting this year, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority will take enhanced steps to assess the funding and liquidity risks of regulated firms. Larger firms will be required to conduct liquidity stress tests, which will focus on the impact of a loss of funding for their proprietary positions, their repo book, settlement and depository payments, and funding of customer balances.
Citing algorithmic trading malfunctions that caused substantial market disruptions, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority plans to monitor whether firms’ testing and controls related to high-frequency trading (HFT) and other algorithmic trading strategies and trading systems are adequate in light of the Market Access Rule and firms’ other supervisory obligations. Oversight may be conducted through both examinations and targeted investigations, according to the letter.
Among other top concerns, the letter also addresses perennial favorites like suitability, conflicts of interest, complex products, and anti-money laundering efforts. Finally, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority has indicated that it will update its view on risk throughout the year, and registered firms should do the same.
If you have any questions about Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s 2014 regulatory and examination priorities, please feel free to fill out the comment section below.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

High-profile founder litigation is more than just a media spectacle. For startup founders, these cases underscore the legal and structural risks that can arise when rapid growth outpaces formal oversight. While launching a new company can be both an exciting and deeply rewarding endeavor, founders must be mindful that it also comes with significant risks. […]
Author: Dan Brecher

Every New Jersey company should periodically evaluate its governance framework. Strong corporate governance protects directors and officers, builds investor confidence, reduces litigation exposure, and positions a company for sustainable growth. The first quarter of the year is a great time to evaluate your corporate governance practices and perform any routine maintenance needed to keep that […]
Author: Ken Hollenbeck

Being served with a lawsuit is one of the most stressful legal events a business or individual can face. Whether the claim involves a contract dispute, an employment matter, an intellectual property issue, or another legal challenge, the actions you take in the first few days can significantly shape the outcome of your case. Acting […]
Author: Robert E. Levy

Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) continue to gain momentum as we move through 2026. After enduring a significant contraction following the 2021 boom and the regulatory scrutiny that followed, SPAC activity rebounded sharply in 2025 and now carries forward into 2026 with real momentum. The SPAC resurgence reflects broader improvements in both market conditions and the […]
Author: Dan Brecher

Compliance programs are no longer judged by how they look on paper, but by how they function in the real world. Compliance monitoring is the ongoing process of reviewing, testing, and evaluating whether policies, procedures, and controls are being followed—and whether they are actually working. What Is Compliance Monitoring? In today’s heightened regulatory environment, compliance […]
Author: Dan Brecher

New Jersey personal guaranty liability is a critical issue for business owners who regularly sign contracts on behalf of their companies. A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision provides valuable guidance on when a business owner can be held personally responsible for a company’s debt. Under the Court’s decision in Extech Building Materials, Inc. v. […]
Author: Charles H. Friedrich
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!