The
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB”) has established a number of
specific interpretive standards under its advertising rule, Rule G-21, in
connection with advertisements used or produced by brokers, dealers and
municipal securities dealers (“dealers”) relating to municipal fund securities,
including in particular advertisements for college savings plans.[1] In addition, the MSRB has provided
interpretive guidance regarding dealers’ point-of-sale disclosure obligations
under the MSRB’s basic fair practice rule, Rule G-17, as such obligations apply
to the marketing of shares of a state’s college savings plan to individuals who
are residents of a different state.
These and other MSRB rules and interpretive positions are designed,
among other purposes, to ensure that material information on the municipal fund
securities market (particularly the rapidly evolving and growing college
savings plan market) is made available in a meaningful and accurate manner to
customers who invest in municipal fund securities through dealers.[2]
In
furtherance of the MSRB’s statutory mandate to protect investors and the public
interest, the MSRB is publishing for industry comment draft amendments to Rule
G-21 that would: (i) require that
performance data included in advertisements for municipal fund securities be
calculated and displayed, together with related legends and disclosures, in the
manner required under Securities Act Rule 482 adopted by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in connection with mutual fund advertisements, with
certain modifications; (ii) require that all advertisements for municipal fund
securities include general disclosure language based in part on a similar
requirement in SEC Rule 482, with additional language in the case of college
savings plan advertisements relating to benefits available solely to state
residents; and (iii) incorporate into the rule language the MSRB’s previously
enunciated interpretive standards, with certain modifications. Furthermore, the MSRB is publishing for
industry comment draft interpretive guidance under Rule G-17 that would broaden
the existing point-of-sale disclosure obligation relating to out-of-state
investments in college savings plans to include disclosures regarding the
potential loss of other state benefits (in addition to tax benefits) that may
be offered to individuals who invest in their home state college savings
plans. The draft amendments and draft
interpretive guidance are described more fully below. Comments are due by September 15, 2004.
DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO RULE G-21, ON ADVERTISING
Rule
G-21 establishes general ethical standards for dealer advertisements.
Under section (b) of the rule, a dealer is prohibited from publishing any
advertisement concerning its facilities, services or skills with respect to
municipal securities that is materially false or misleading. In addition,
a dealer is prohibited under section (c) of the rule from publishing any
advertisement concerning municipal securities that it knows or has reason to
know is materially false or misleading.[3]
Rule G-21 generally does not require that any specific statements or
information be included in an advertisement but does require that any statement
or information that is included not be materially false or misleading.[4] Advertisements are defined broadly under the
rule and generally consist of any materials published or designed for use in
the public, including electronic (e.g., Internet web sites, form e-mail
messages, scripted telemarketing calls, fax broadcasts), media (e.g.,
print, television, radio) or promotional literature designed for dissemination
to the public, such as notices, circulars, reports, market letters, form
letters, telemarketing scripts or reprints or excerpts of the foregoing. However, issuer-prepared disclosure
materials such as program disclosure documents produced in connection with
college savings plans or information statements produced in connection with
local government investment pools are not considered advertisements for purposes
of Rule G-21.[5]
In
an interpretive notice published in 2002 (the “2002 MSRB Notice”), the MSRB
established specific standards for inclusion of certain types of information in
municipal fund security advertisements, with emphasis on college savings plan
advertisements.[6] Today, the MSRB is proposing draft
amendments to Rule G-21 that would incorporate the advertising standards
enunciated in the 2002 MSRB Notice, with certain modifications described
below. The standards from the 2002 MSRB
Notice would be supplemented by specific requirements regarding the calculation
and display of performance data in advertisements in a manner consistent with
SEC Rule 482. In addition, the draft
amendments would include general disclosure requirements regarding municipal
fund securities that are similar in most respects to generalized disclosures
currently required for mutual fund advertisements under SEC Rule 482. The draft amendments are included at the end
of this notice. If the draft amendments
are adopted, the MSRB would expect to withdraw the portions of the 2002 MSRB
Notice relating to advertisements. The
MSRB seeks comments on all aspects of the draft amendments.
Historical Performance Data
Current
Standard. Under current Rule
G-21 as interpreted in the 2002 MSRB Notice, the use of historical performance
data in an advertisement requires a description of the nature and significance
of such data to assure that the advertisement is not false or misleading.
Further, depending upon the facts and circumstances, a dealer may be required
to disclose information on fees or other charges that may have a material
effect on the advertised performance data if necessary to ensure that the
advertisement is not materially false or misleading. An advertisement that includes performance data must make clear
that such information relates to past performance, which may not be indicative
of future investment performance.
Except as
described in the preceding paragraph, the MSRB has not specified that dealers
must calculate or display performance data contained in municipal fund security
advertisements in any particular manner.
This contrasts with existing regulation of mutual fund advertisements
that include performance data. SEC Rule
482 sets forth detailed requirements on how such data, if included in mutual
fund advertisements, must be calculated and displayed, in part by reference to
the registration statements used for registration of mutual funds and variable
annuities.[7] Thus, performance data presented by a dealer
in a mutual fund advertisement generally must be consistent with performance
data presented by the mutual fund itself in its registration statement.
In the case of
municipal fund securities, however, issuers are not subject to the registration
requirements of the Securities Act of 1933 under Section 3(a)(2) or the
Investment Company Act of 1940 under Section 2(b). Thus, there are no mandated methods for issuers of municipal fund
securities to calculate performance, nor is there any requirement for such
issuers to make such calculations or to present performance data in any
document available to investors or others.
The methods of computing mutual fund performance under SEC rules are
based in part on the assumption that mutual funds are structured in accordance
with the limitations imposed by the Investment Company Act. Because issuers of municipal fund securities
are exempt from the Investment Company Act and most other federal securities
laws, they may act in their best judgment in widely divergent manners in
structuring their programs and securities.
Some of these structures may introduce variants on the traditional
mutual fund models that can result in the SEC calculation methods to be not
ideally suited, without modification, for calculating performance of these
municipal fund securities.
The 2002 MSRB
Notice did not include guidance on performance calculations and other matters
covered by SEC Rule 482 since the provisions of that rule were then subject to
change as a result of the publication for comment by the SEC of proposed
amendments to Rule 482 simultaneously with the publication of the 2002 MSRB
Notice.[8] The 2002 MSRB Notice did confirm previous
guidance in which the MSRB had stated that a municipal fund security
advertisement that would be compliant with the SEC and NASD mutual fund
advertising rules, if applied to the municipal fund security advertisement as
if municipal fund securities were shares of a registered mutual fund, also
would be in compliance with MSRB Rule G-21.
Thus, a dealer wishing to include performance data in an advertisement
could electively use the methods required by the SEC for mutual fund
advertisements under SEC Rule 482 with the assurance that the advertisement
would be in compliance with the MSRB’s advertising rule. However, dealers are not required to use
these SEC methods and currently are permitted to display performance in ways
that diverge from the standards that exist in the mutual fund industry, so long
as the performance data is not false or misleading. The lack of specific required computational and presentation
standards could result in significantly less comparability between different
municipal fund security advertisements than currently exists for mutual fund
advertisements.
Draft Amendments. Proposed new section (e)(ii) of Rule G-21
would require dealer advertisements of municipal fund securities that include
performance data to comply with the method of computing and displaying
performance data for mutual funds as prescribed in section (d) or (e) of SEC
Rule 482, with certain modifications.
The modifications included in the draft language reflect the fact that
certain items of information that exist in the mutual fund industry – such as
the registration statement and the specific items of information required to be
disclosed in the prospectus and statement of additional information – do not
exist for municipal fund securities. In
particular, the draft language provides that: (A) a dealer can use information
provided in the issuer’s official statement, otherwise made available by the
issuer, or otherwise obtained from other reliable sources to calculate
performance to the extent such information is not available from a balance
sheet in a registration statement or from a prospectus; (B) the life of a
municipal fund securities issue should be measured from when the issuer first
issues the securities; (C) performance data in advertisements must be
calculated as of the most recent calendar quarter ended prior to the submission
of the advertisement for publication for which such performance data, or all
information required for the calculation of such performance data, is
reasonably available to the dealer; and (D) expenses having the same
characteristics as those permitted to be paid under Investment Company Act Rule
12b-1 but not technically accrued under a 12b-1 plan must be treated as 12b-1
expenses for purposes of calculating performance.[9] In addition, the draft language confirms
that these provisions of Rule G-21 would apply solely to the calculation of
performance relating to municipal fund securities and not to the calculation of
performance for any security (such as a mutual fund) held as an underlying
asset of the municipal fund securities.
Proposed Rule
G-21(e)(ii) would effectively provide that, for municipal fund securities other
than those that are held out by the issuer as having the characteristics of a
money market fund, quotations of performance in an advertisement would be
limited to the average annual total return, current yield (but only if
accompanied by average annual total return), tax-equivalent yield (but only if
accompanied by average annual total return and current yield), after-tax return
(but only if accompanied by average annual total return), or other
non-prescribed performance measures (but only if accompanied by average annual
total return and, if adjusted to reflect the effects of taxes, after-tax
return), as provided in SEC Rule 482(d).
In the case of municipal fund securities that are held out by the issuer
as having the characteristics of a money market fund, quotations of performance
in an advertisement would be limited to the current yield, effective yield (but
only if accompanied by current yield), tax-equivalent yield or tax-equivalent
effective yield (but only if accompanied by current yield), or total return
(but only if accompanied by current yield), as provided in SEC Rule 482(e).[10] Performance data included in municipal fund
security advertisements would be required to be displayed in the manner
provided in section (d) or (e) of SEC Rule 482, as appropriate, with respect to
prominence and positioning of information.
The
MSRB understands that it is possible that, even with the modifications
described above, the methods of calculating performance prescribed under SEC
Rule 482(d) or (e) may not be well suited for certain municipal fund security
structures. The MSRB seeks specific,
detailed comments addressing any shortcomings in the proposed calculation
methods for particular structures (including descriptions of the specific
features of such structures that cause the proposed calculation methods to be
deficient) and what further modifications, deletions or additions would be
needed to make such calculation methods produce meaningful information for
investors that is not misleading.
In addition, the
draft amendments include in new Section (e)(i)(B) certain related legends and
disclosures currently required under SEC Rule 482 for mutual funds
advertisements that display performance information. These disclosures emphasize that the performance data is
historical and does not guarantee future results,[11]
that the value of holdings is subject to fluctuation, and that current
performance may be different from the performance data included in the
advertisement. Pursuant to the draft
amendments, advertisements containing performance data also would be required
to include the maximum amount of any sales load or other nonrecurring fee and,
if such load or fee is not reflected in the performance data, to disclose that
the load or fee is not so reflected and that performance would be lower if it
had been reflected.[12] The MSRB views the nonrecurring fees that
would be the subject of this disclosure as including such fees imposed not only
by the dealer but also by the issuer or any other party to the issuance of the
municipal fund securities or the maintenance of investments therein. New Section (e)(i)(C) would require that
these legends and disclosures be presented in the same format required under
SEC Rule 482.
General Disclosures
SEC
Rule 482 requires that most mutual fund advertisements include generalized
disclosure that investors should consider the fund’s investment objectives,
risks and charges before investing; that the prospectus contains this and other
information about the fund; that the prospectus should be read carefully before
investing; and identifying where a prospectus can be obtained. In the case of a money market fund, Rule 482
also requires disclosure that investments are not insured and, if the fund seeks
to maintain a stable net asset value, it is still possible to lose money. Such disclosures are not currently required
under MSRB Rule G-21 for municipal fund security advertisements.
The draft
amendments would include in section (e)(i)(A) of Rule G-21 a provision modeled
after these SEC general disclosure requirements, with certain
modifications. The modifications
recognize the difference between the prospectus required for mutual funds and
the official statement indirectly required for municipal fund securities under
Exchange Act Rule 15c2-12 adopted by the SEC.[13] In addition, new section (e)(i)(A)(1) would
require that advertisements of college savings plans include a statement that
advises investors to consider whether their home states offer tax or other
benefits that are only available when investing in their home states’ college
savings plan.[14] New section (e)(i)(C) would require that
these general disclosures be presented in the same format required under SEC
Rule 482.
The MSRB observes
that municipal fund securities consisting of interests in college savings plans
are oriented exclusively to retail investors and entail a number of features
with which most potential investors may not be familiar. In addition, the perception that college
savings plan interests and mutual fund shares are substantially the same
investment product may not reflect reality and may lead many investors to
believe that the same rules and structures apply in the college savings plan
market as in the mutual fund market. The
MSRB currently provides general information regarding college savings plans and
certain information for investors at its web site.[15] The MSRB seeks comment on whether the
proposed general disclosure language required under new section (e)(i)(A)(1)
for advertisements of college savings plans also should include specific
reference to an MSRB-maintained web site where generalized information of this
nature would be provided and, if so, the extent to which the information
currently provided on the MSRB web site described above should be included,
modified, supplemented or deleted.[16]
Additional Amendments Based on 2002 MSRB
Notice
The
2002 MSRB Notice provides guidance with respect to a number of other elements
that may appear in municipal fund security advertisements. These relate to the nature of the issuer and
the securities, the capacity of the dealer and other parties, tax consequences,
and information about the mutual funds in which municipal fund security assets are
invested. The draft amendments would
include new paragraphs (iii) through (vi) of section (e) that would codify into
the rule language these interpretive positions, with limited modifications
noted below.
Nature of
Issuer and Security. Draft
section (e)(iii) would require that an advertisement: (i) for a specific
municipal fund security provide sufficient information to identify the specific
security in a manner that is not false or misleading; (ii) that identifies a
specific municipal fund security include the name of the issuer, presented in a
manner no less prominent than any other entity identified in the advertisement,
and not imply that a different entity is the issuer of the municipal fund
security; (iii) not raise an inference that, because municipal fund securities
are issued under a government-sponsored plan, investors are guaranteed against
investment losses if no such guarantee exists; and (iv) that concerns a
specific class or category of an issuer’s municipal fund securities (e.g.,
A shares versus B shares; direct sale shares versus advisor shares; in-state
shares versus national shares; etc.) clearly disclose this fact in a manner no
less prominent than the information provided with respect to such class or
category.[17]
Capacity of
Dealer and Other Parties. Draft section (e)(iv) would require an
advertisement that relates to or describes services provided with respect to
municipal fund securities to clearly indicate the entity providing such
services. In addition, an advertisement soliciting purchases of municipal
fund securities that would be effected by any party other than the dealer that
publishes the advertisement (i.e., the issuer or another dealer) must
clearly state which entity would effect the transaction.
Tax
Consequences and Other Features. Draft section (e)(v) would
require that any discussion of tax implications or other benefits or features
of investments in municipal fund securities included in an advertisement not be
false or misleading.[18]
In the case of an advertisement that includes statements regarding tax or other
benefits offered under state or federal law, the advertisement must make clear
the nature of such benefits and that the availability of such benefits may be
materially limited based upon residency, purpose for or timing of share
redemptions, or other factors, as applicable, which limitations must be
described in the advertisement and presented in close proximity to, and in a
manner no less prominent than, the description of such benefits.[19]
Underlying
Registered Securities. Draft section (e)(vi) would require that,
if an advertisement for a municipal fund security provides specific details of
a security held as an underlying asset of the municipal fund security, the
details included in the advertisement relating to such underlying security be
presented in a manner that would be in compliance with any SEC or NASD
advertising rules that would be applicable if the advertisement related solely
to such underlying security. However,
details of the underlying security so included in the advertisement must be
accompanied by any further statements relating to such details necessary to
ensure that the inclusion of such details does not cause the advertisement to
be false or misleading with respect to the municipal fund securities
advertised.[20] Further, the draft rule language would make
clear that this provision does not limit the applicability of any rule of the
SEC, NASD or any other regulatory body relating to advertisements of securities
other than municipal fund securities, including advertisements that contain
information about such other securities together with information about
municipal fund securities.[21]
DRAFT
INTERPRETIVE GUIDANCE ON DISCLOSURE OF IN-STATE BENEFITS UNDER RULE G-17
The
MSRB has interpreted Rule G-17 to require a dealer to disclose to its customer
at or prior to the time of trade (i.e., at the point-of-sale) all
material facts about the transaction known by the dealer, as well as material
facts about the security that are reasonably accessible to the market.[22] In the 2002 MSRB Notice, the MSRB stated
that Rule G-17 also obligates a dealer that sells to a customer an out-of-state
college savings plan interest to disclose that, depending upon the laws of the
customer’s home state, favorable state tax treatment for investing in a college
savings plan may be limited to investments made in a college savings plan
offered by the customer’s home state.[23] The obligation to disclose the potential
loss of state tax benefits could be met if the required disclosure is included
in the official statement delivered to the customer, appearing in a manner
reasonably likely to be noted by an investor.
This disclosure is required in all transactions effected by a dealer
with a customer investing in an out-of-state college savings plan, regardless
of whether the dealer has made a recommendation to the customer.
In
addition to state tax benefits, some states offer some or all of their
residents, if they invest in their in-state college savings plan, other
benefits such as scholarships to in-state colleges, matching grants into their
college savings plan accounts, or reduced or waived program fees, among other
benefits. In some cases, the value of
these other benefits can be considerably higher than the state tax benefits
offered by some states. This can be particularly
true for those benefits that the state may specifically target toward its
lower-income residents. The nature of
these other benefits can vary from state to state even more than state tax
benefits and may be even less well understood by the general investing public.
Thus,
the MSRB is publishing for comment draft interpretive guidance that would
broaden the existing Rule G-17 point-of-sale disclosure interpretation to
include reference to other potential benefits offered solely in connection with
in-state investments. The guidance
would clarify that such disclosure made through the issuer’s official statement
is effective for purposes of the Rule G-17 point-of-sale disclosure obligation
only if the official statement is provided to the customer at or prior to the
time of trade and would strengthen the minimum standards for prominence in the
official statement required to satisfy the disclosure obligation by means of
the official statement.
The
draft interpretive language is set forth below:
In
the case of sales to a customer of out-of-state college savings plan interests,
Rule G-17 requires a dealer to disclose, at or prior to the time of trade,
that, depending upon the laws of the customer’s home state, favorable state tax
treatment for investing in a college savings plan or other benefits offered
under state law in connection with investing in college savings plans may be
available only if the customer invests in a college savings plan offered by the
customer’s home state. The dealer also must suggest to such customer that
he or she consult with a qualified adviser or contact his or her home state’s
college savings plan to learn more about any state tax or other benefits that
might be available in conjunction with an investment in that state’s college
savings plan.
This
disclosure obligation may be met if the disclosure appears in the official
statement, so long as the official statement has been delivered to the customer
by the time of trade and the disclosure appears in the official statement in a
manner that is reasonably likely to be noted by an investor. A presentation of this disclosure in the
official statement in close proximity and with equal prominence to the first
presentation of information regarding other federal or state tax-related
consequences of investing in the college savings plan, and in close proximity
and with equal prominence to each other presentation of information regarding
state tax-related consequences of investing in the college savings plan, would
be deemed to satisfy this requirement.
However, the MSRB has no authority to mandate inclusion of any
particular items in the official statement. Thus, if the issuer has not
included this information in the official statement in the described manner,
the dealer would remain obligated to disclose such information separately to
the customer under Rule G-17.
Of
course, should the dealer proceed to provide information about state tax or
other benefits available to an out-of-state investor, it must ensure that the
information is not false or misleading.
For example, a dealer would violate Rule G-17 if it were to inform a
customer that investment in the college savings plan of the customer’s own
state did not provide the customer with any state tax or other benefit when the
dealer knows or has reason to know that such benefit likely would be
available. A dealer also would violate Rule G-17 if it were to inform a
customer that investment in the college savings plan of another state would
provide the customer with the same tax or other benefits as would be available
if the customer were to invest in his or her own state’s plan, if the dealer
knows or has reason to know that this is not the case.
If the draft interpretive guidance is
adopted, the MSRB would expect to withdraw the portions of the 2002 MSRB Notice
relating to such Rule G-17 point-of-sale disclosure obligation. The MSRB seeks comments on all aspects of
the draft interpretive guidance.
* * * * *
Comments from all interested parties are
welcome. Comments should be submitted
no later than September 15, 2004 and may be directed to Ernesto A. Lanza,
Senior Associate General Counsel, or Jill C. Finder, Assistant General
Counsel. Written comments will be
available for public inspection.
June 10, 2004
* * * * *
TEXT OF DRAFT
AMENDMENTS TO RULE G-21[24]
Rule G-21. Advertising.
(a)-(c) No change.
(d) New Issue Advertisements. In addition to the
requirements of section (c), all advertisements for new issue municipal
securities (other than municipal fund securities) shall also
be subject to the following requirements:
(i)-(ii) No change.
(e) [NEW SECTION] Municipal Fund Security
Advertisements. In addition to the requirements of section (c), all
advertisements for municipal fund securities shall be subject to the following
requirements:
(i) Required disclosures. Each advertisement for municipal fund
securities:
(A) must include a statement that advises an
investor to consider the investment objectives, risks, and charges and expenses
associated with the municipal fund securities before investing; explains that
more information about the securities is available in the issuer’s official
statement; identifies a source from which an investor may obtain an official
statement; and states that the official statement should be read carefully
before investing. In addition, the
following disclosures must be included, as applicable:
(1) if the
advertisement relates to municipal fund securities issued by a qualified
tuition program under Internal Revenue Code Section 529, a statement that
advises an investor to consider, before investing, whether the investor’s home
state offers any state tax or other benefits that are only available for
investments in such state’s qualified tuition program.
(2) if the
advertisement is for a municipal fund security that the issuer holds out as
having the characteristics of a money market fund, statements to the effect
that an investment in the security is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency (unless such
guarantee is provided by or on behalf of such issuer) and, if the security is
held out as maintaining a stable net asset value, that although the issuer
seeks to preserve the value of the investment at $1.00 per share or such other
applicable fixed share price, it is possible to lose money by investing in the
security.
(B) that includes
performance data must include:
(1) a legend
disclosing that the performance data included in the advertisement represents
past performance; that past performance does not guarantee future results; that
the investment return and the value of the investment will fluctuate so that an
investor’s shares, when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original
cost; and that current performance may be lower or higher than the performance
data included in the advertisement; and
(2) if a sales
load or any other nonrecurring fee is charged, the maximum amount of the load
or fee and, if the sales load or fee is not reflected in the performance data
included in the advertisement, a statement that the performance data does not
reflect the deduction of the sales load or fee and that the performance data
would be lower if such load or fee were included.
(C) must present
the statements required by clauses (A) and (B) of this paragraph, when in a
print advertisement, in a type size at least as large as and of a style
different from, but at least as prominent as, that used in the major portion of
the advertisement, provided that when performance data is presented in a type
size smaller than that of the major portion of the advertisement, the
statements required by clause (B) of this paragraph may appear in a type size
no smaller than that of the performance data.
If an advertisement is delivered through an electronic medium, the
legibility requirements for the statements required by clauses (A) and (B) of
this paragraph relating to type size and style may be satisfied by presenting
the statements in any manner reasonably calculated to draw investor attention
to them. In a radio or television
advertisement, the statements required by clauses (A) and (B) of this paragraph
must be given emphasis equal to that used in the major portion of the
advertisement. The statements required
by clause (B) of this paragraph must be presented in close proximity to the
performance data and, in a print advertisement, must be presented in the body
of the advertisement and not in a footnote unless the performance data appears
only in such footnote.
(ii) Performance data. Each
advertisement that includes performance data relating to municipal fund
securities must present performance data in the format, and calculated pursuant
to the methods, prescribed in paragraph (d) of Securities Act Rule 482 (or, in
the case of a municipal fund security that the issuer holds out as having the
characteristics of a money market fund, paragraph (e) of Securities Act Rule
482), provided that:
(A) to the extent
that information necessary to calculate performance data is not available from
an applicable balance sheet included in a registration statement, or from a
prospectus, the broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer shall use
information derived from the issuer’s official statement, otherwise made
available by the issuer or its agents, or (when unavailable from the official
statement, the issuer or the issuer’s agents) derived from such other sources
which the broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer reasonably believes are
reliable;
(B) if the issuer
first began issuing the municipal fund securities fewer than one, five, or ten
years prior to the date of the submission of the advertisement for publication,
such shorter period shall be substituted for any otherwise prescribed longer
period in connection with the calculation of average annual total return or any
similar returns;
(C) performance
data shall be calculated as of the most recent calendar quarter ended prior to
the submission of the advertisement for publication for which such performance
data, or all information required for the calculation of such performance data,
is reasonably available to the broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer as
described in clause (A) of this paragraph;
(D) where such
calculation is required to include expenses accrued under a plan adopted under
Investment Company Act Rule 12b-1, the broker, dealer or municipal securities
dealer shall include all such expenses as well as any expenses having the same
characteristics as expenses under such a plan where such a plan is not required
to be adopted under said Rule 12b-1 as a result of Section 2(b) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940;
(E)
notwithstanding any of the foregoing, this paragraph shall apply solely to the
calculation of performance relating to municipal fund securities and does not
apply to, or limit the applicability of any rule of the Commission, NASD or any
other regulatory body relating to, the calculation of performance for any
security held as an underlying asset of the municipal fund securities.
(iii) Nature of issuer and security.
An advertisement for a specific municipal fund security must provide sufficient
information to identify such specific security in a manner that is not false or
misleading. An advertisement that identifies a specific municipal fund
security must include the name of the issuer, presented in a manner no less
prominent than any other entity identified in the advertisement, and must not
imply that a different entity is the issuer of the municipal fund
security. An advertisement must not raise an inference that, because
municipal fund securities are issued under a government-sponsored plan,
investors are guaranteed against investment losses if no such guarantee
exists. If an advertisement concerns a specific class or category of an
issuer’s municipal fund securities (e.g., A shares versus B shares;
direct sale shares versus advisor shares; in-state shares versus national
shares; etc.), this must clearly be disclosed in a manner no less prominent
than the information provided with respect to such class or category.
(iv) Capacity of dealer and other parties.
An advertisement that relates to or describes services provided with respect to
municipal fund securities must clearly indicate the entity providing those
services. An advertisement soliciting purchases of municipal fund
securities that would be effected by a broker, dealer or municipal securities
dealer or any other entity other than the broker, dealer or municipal
securities dealer that publishes the advertisement must clearly state which
entity would effect the transaction.
(v) Tax consequences and other features.
Any discussion of tax implications or other benefits or features of investments
in municipal fund securities included in an advertisement must not be false or
misleading. In the case of an advertisement that includes statements
regarding tax or other benefits offered under state or federal law, the
advertisement must make clear the nature of such benefits and that the
availability of such benefits may be materially limited based upon residency,
purpose for or timing of share redemptions, or other factors, as applicable,
which limitations must be described in the advertisement and presented in close
proximity to, and in a manner no less prominent than, the description of such
benefits.
(vi) Underlying registered securities.
If an advertisement for a municipal fund security provides specific details of
a security held as an underlying asset of the municipal fund security, the
details included in the advertisement relating to such underlying security must
be presented in a manner that would be in compliance with any Commission or
NASD advertising rules that would be applicable if the advertisement related
solely to such underlying security; provided that details of the underlying
security must be accompanied by any further statements relating to such details
as are necessary to ensure that the inclusion of such details does not cause
the advertisement to be false or misleading with respect to the municipal fund
securities advertised. This paragraph
does not limit the applicability of any rule of the Commission, NASD or any
other regulatory body relating to advertisements of securities other than
municipal fund securities, including advertisements that contain information
about such other securities together with information about municipal
securities. [END NEW SECTION]
(f) (e) No change.
* * * * *
The text of SEC Rule 482 is available at http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-8294.htm.
SEC Form N-1A is available at http://www.sec.gov/about/forms/formn-1a.pdf.
SEC Form N-3 is available at http://www.sec.gov/about/forms/formn-3.pdf.
SEC Form N-4 is available at http://www.sec.gov/about/forms/formn-4.pdf.
[1] Municipal fund securities are defined in Rule D-12 as
municipal securities issued by an issuer that, but for the application of
Section 2(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, would constitute an
investment company under the Act.
Section 2(b) of the Investment Company Act provides that the Act does
not apply to, among others, a state or any political subdivision of a state, or
any agency, authority, or instrumentality of a state. There are two principal forms of municipal fund securities that
are marketed by dealers: (i) interests
or shares in college savings plans, which are established by states under
Section 529(b)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as “qualified
tuition programs” through which individuals make investments for the purpose of
accumulating savings for qualifying higher education costs of beneficiaries;
and (ii) interests or shares in local government investment pools, which are
established by state or local governments as vehicles for the pooled investment
of public moneys of participating governmental entities. So-called “pre-paid tuition plans” established
by states or higher education institutions under Section 529(b)(A)(i) of the
Internal Revenue Code generally are not considered municipal fund securities.
[2] Many municipal fund securities are marketed directly to
customers by issuer personnel, rather than through dealers. Since the MSRB’s rulemaking authority under
Section 15B of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is limited to dealer
transactions in municipal securities, MSRB rules do not apply to issuers or
their personnel who market municipal fund securities directly to customers.
[3] The rule also establishes standards for advertising
initial reoffering prices or yields of new issue municipal securities under
section (d). This provision is designed
for advertisements by underwriting syndicates for municipal debt offerings and
does not deal with matters relevant to the municipal fund securities
markets. The draft amendments would
explicitly exempt municipal fund security advertisements from this provision.
[4] For example, if a dealer makes a statement in an
advertisement that explicitly or implicitly refers to a particular feature of a
security (e.g., the soundness or safety of an investment in the
security), the dealer must include any information necessary to ensure that the
advertisement is not materially false or misleading with respect to the
feature. See Rule G-21 Interpretive Letter – Disclosure obligations, May
21, 1998, reprinted in MSRB Rule Book.
[5] Program disclosure documents, information statements and
other issuer-prepared disclosure materials used in connection with municipal
fund securities are referred to as “official statements” under MSRB and SEC
rules. See infra footnote
13. The MSRB has no regulatory
authority over issuer disclosure documents.
[6] See Rule G-21 Interpretation – Application of Fair
Practice and Advertising Rules to Municipal Fund Securities, May 14, 2002, reprinted
in MSRB Rule Book. The 2002 MSRB
Notice also confirmed previous guidance on advertisements of municipal fund
securities published in 2001. See
Rule G-30 Interpretation – Interpretive Notice on Commissions and Other
Charges, Advertisements and Official Statements Relating to Municipal Fund
Securities, December 19, 2001, reprinted in MSRB Rule Book.
[7] SEC Rule 482 references Form N-1A (registration statement
for open-end management investment companies), Form N-3 (registration statement
for variable annuities registered as investment companies) and Form N-4
(registration statement for variable annuities registered as unit investment
trusts).
[8] See Investment Company Act Release No. 25575 (May
17, 2002), 67 FR 36712 (May 24, 2002).
The proposed amendments were ultimately adopted by the SEC, with limited
modifications, in September 2003 and became fully effective for mutual fund
advertisements submitted for publication after March 31, 2004. See Investment Company Act Release
No. 26195 (September 29, 2003), 68 FR 57760 (October 6, 2003).
[9] Thus, asset-based charges paid to the program manager or
investment advisor, to the issuer or its agents, or to any other party
generally would be viewed as being treated as 12b-1 expenses for purposes of
calculating performance even if any such charges may not technically be paid
under a formal 12b-1 plan. In addition,
any 12b-1 expenses incurred in connection with underlying assets of the
municipal fund securities also must be treated as 12b-1 expenses of the
municipal fund securities to the extent that such expenses are not waived or
not included within the asset-based charges described in the preceding
sentence.
[10] As noted above, SEC Rule 482 incorporates the calculation
methods set forth in Forms N-1, N-3 and N-4 for purposes of calculating the
various types of quotations described in the rule. The MSRB seeks comments on
whether, as the draft amendment to Rule G-21(e)(ii) is formulated, it would be
clear which SEC registration form would be applicable to each type of municipal
fund security structure in existence or whether any of the specified
registration forms should be excluded for purposes of draft section (e)(ii).
[11] The 2002 MSRB Notice already requires this disclosure, as
described above.
[12] Under the 2002 MSRB Notice, similar disclosures might be
required depending on the facts and circumstances, as described above.
[13] SEC Rule 15c2-12 provides, among other things, that the
underwriter for most primary offerings of municipal securities must obtain and
review the issuer’s near-final official statement before purchasing or offering
the securities, contract with the issuer to receive copies of the final
official statement within specified timeframes after the final agreement to
purchase or offer the securities, and distribute copies of the official
statement to potential customers upon request.
For purposes of the rule, a final official statement must set forth
information concerning the terms of the issue; information, including financial
or operating data, concerning the issuer and other entities, enterprises,
funds, accounts and other persons material to an evaluation of the offering;
and a description of undertakings regarding the provision of secondary market
information, as well as disclosure of any failures to provide such information
during the past five years.
[14] This is similar to the disclosure that is required on a
customer-by-customer basis pursuant to the 2002 MSRB Notice under a dealer’s
Rule G-17 point-of-sale disclosure obligation in the case of sales to a
customer of college savings plan interests issued by a state other than the
customer’s home state, as more fully described below. However, it is broadened to refer not only to state tax benefits but
also to other benefits that may be provided under state law (e.g., lower
fees, matching grants, scholarships to state colleges, or other financial
benefits). As described below, the MSRB
is proposing to expand the point-of-sale disclosure requirement to also
reference the possible existence of other non-tax state benefits.
[15] Product information is provided at
www.msrb.org/msrb1/mfs/mfs529csp.asp and information for investors is provided
at www.msrb.org/msrb1/mfs/ruleinfo.asp.
[16] For example, the general disclosure for a college savings
plan advertisement might include a statement that general information about
investing in college savings plans is available on-line at
http://about529s.msrb.org.
[17] The draft amendment would modify the existing interpretive
guidance by requiring that the disclosure that an advertisement concerns a
specific class of securities be presented in the specified manner.
[18] The draft amendment would modify the existing interpretive
guidance by extending the applicability of the language to discussions of other
benefits or features in addition to tax-related matters.
[19] The draft amendment would modify the existing interpretive
guidance by providing specific examples of certain limitations on
benefits. For example, if an
advertisement notes that investors in a particular college savings plan may
qualify for scholarships or matching grants, the advertisement may also need to
state that such scholarships or matching grants are available only for
attendance at in-state colleges or to in-state investors, if that is in fact
the case. The draft amendment also
would modify the existing interpretive guidance by requiring that such
limitations be presented in the specified manner.
[20] The draft amendment would modify the existing language of
the interpretive guidance to explicitly state that further clarifying
information may need to be included to ensure that the advertisement is not
false or misleading. Because Rule G-21
already requires that advertisements not be false or misleading, this would not
be a new principle under the rule.
[21] This language, which does not appear in the existing
interpretive language, recognizes that other regulatory organizations may apply
their own rules to the extent of their regulatory jurisdiction. See, e.g., NASD Special Notice to
Members 03-17 – Sales Material for Municipal Fund Securities, March 25, 2003.
[22] See Rule G-17 Interpretation – Interpretive Notice
Regarding Rule G-17, on Disclosure of Material Facts, March 20, 2002, reprinted
in MSRB Rule Book.
[23] Since dealers could not reasonably be expected to become
expert in state tax laws throughout the country, the MSRB noted that such
disclosure, coupled with a suggestion that the customer consult a tax adviser
about any state tax consequences of the investment, would provide adequate
notice of the potential loss of in-state tax benefits. The MSRB observed, however, that if the
dealer proceeded to provide information about state tax consequences, it must
ensure under Rule G-17 that the information is not false or misleading.
[24] Underlining signifies insertions; strikethrough signifies
deletions.