Courtesy of Larry Doyle.
I have long maintained that a self-regulatory model for monitoring Wall Street does not and will not work. To think that the brokerage industry could be properly monitored by an organization that it funds in large measure strikes me as ridiculous.
I witness further evidence of this reality in a report that some might think is an indication that this self-regulator, FINRA, is getting tough on Wall Street. If this is tough, then let me puff up the pillows for you and get you a cup of warm cocoa. Let’s navigate as The Wall Street Journal writes this morning:
Under pressure from Washington to crack down on rogue stockbrokers, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is highlighting a fast-track program it began earlier this year to go after what it calls “high-risk brokers.”
The results: Forty-two of the most troubled brokers were targeted for “expedited investigation,” and 16 of them were thrown out of the securities industry, Finra Chairman and Chief Executive Richard Ketchum wrote in a Nov. 13 letter to Sen. Edward Markey (D., Mass.).
The high-risk brokers program was launched in February, and Mr. Ketchum wrote that it shows that Finra officials realize “the potential harm individual brokers can cause investors and the need to confront them more quickly.”
FINRA oversees over 600,000 brokers. What do readers think about the fact that FINRA designated 42 of them as worthy of an expedited investigation and that 16 of them were tossed? Is the financial industry this clean? You think?
Some outsiders said the numbers so far seem small. Philip Aidikoff, a Beverly Hills, Calif., lawyer who represents investors in claims against brokerage firms, said the total of 42 people targeted by the high-risk brokers program since February appears “incredibly” low compared with the scale of problems he believes exist in the securities industry.
And if transparency remains the great disinfectant, FINRA continues to keep the blinds closed. Ketchum . . .
. . . didn’t disclose the exact procedures used by Finra’s Office of Fraud Detection and Market Intelligence to zero in on suspicious brokers. A Finra spokeswoman said the criteria are “regulatory information that we shouldn’t disclose.”
All of which begs the question of how FINRA oversees and addresses ‘high-risk’ management within the financial industry.
Do you think high-risk brokers engaged in an array of unsavory practices are always acting on their own? Do you think there is a chance, if not a likelihood, that pressure applied by management to generate revenue — often by seriously bending if not breaking the rules — is the real driving force behind a meaningful percentage of the practices that harm investors? I have no doubt.
So Mr. Ketchum, what is FINRA doing on that front? How many high-risk managers have you found, or are these individuals too firmly embedded so as to be above the fray?
Can you get back to us on that?
Any brokers or financial planners in the crowd care to weigh in on this topic?
Navigate accordingly.
