Select regulatory documents by category:
Notice 2017-11 - Request for Comment
Publication date: | Comment due:
Information for:

Bank Dealers, Issuers, Municipal Advisors

Rule Number:

Rule G-34

1.  Acacia Financial Group, Inc.: Letter from Noreen P. White, Co-President, and Kim M. Whelan, Co-President, dated June 29, 2017

2.  American Bankers Association: Letter from Cristeena G. Naser, Vice President and Senior Counsel, Center for Securities, Trust and Investment, dated June 30, 2017

3.  Bloomberg L.P.: Letter from Peter Warms, Senior Manager of Fixed Income, Entity, Regulatory Content and Symbology

4.  Bond Dealers of America: Letter from Mike Nicholas, Chief Executive Officer, dated June 29, 2017

5.  Center for Municipal Finance: Letter from Marc D. Joffe, President, dated June 28, 2017

6.  Eastern Bank: Letter 

7.  Fieldman Rolapp & Associates: Letter from Adam S. Bauer, Chief Executive Officer and President, dated June 30, 2017

8.  Government Capital Securities Corp: Email from Ted Christensen dated June 1, 2017

9.  Government Finance Officers Association: Letter from Emily Brock, Director, Federal Liaison Center, dated June 30, 2017

10.  National Association of Municipal Advisors: Letter from Susan Gaffney, Executive Director, dated June 30, 2017

11.  New Jersey State League of Municipalities: Letter from Michael F. Cerra, Assistant Executive Director, dated June 27, 2017

12.  PFM: Letter from Leo Karwejna, Chief Compliance Officer, Cheryl Maddox, General Counsel, and Catherine Humphrey-Bennett, Municipal Advisory Compliance Officer, dated July 3, 2017

13.  Piper Jaffray & Co.: Letter from Frank Fairman, Managing Director, Head of Public Finance Services, and Rebecca Lawrence, Managing Director, Associate General Counsel, Public Finance and Fixed Income, dated June 29, 2017

14.  Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: Letter from Leslie M. Norwood, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, dated June 30, 2017

15.  Southern Municipal Advisors, Inc.: Letter from Michael C. Cawley, Senior Consultant, dated June 29, 2017

16.  Township of East Brunswick: Email from L. Mason Neely dated June 2, 2017

Notice 2017-10 - Approval Notice
Publication date:
Notice 2017-09 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Interpretive Guidance - Interpretive Notices
Publication date:
Excerpt from Notice of Application of MSRB Rules to Solicitor Municipal Advisors

The MSRB amended Rule G-17, regarding fair dealing, to require that, in the conduct of their municipal advisory activities, municipal advisors, including solicitor municipal advisors, and their associated persons must deal fairly with all persons and not engage in any deceptive, dishonest, or unfair practice. (Previously, the rule applied only to dealers and their associated persons.) Rule G-17 became applicable to all municipal advisors, including solicitor municipal advisors, and their associated persons, on December 22, 2010.

Rule G-17 contains an anti-fraud prohibition similar to the standard set forth in Rule 10b-5 adopted by the SEC under the Exchange Act. Thus, all municipal advisors must refrain from engaging in certain conduct and must not misrepresent or omit the facts, risks, or other material information about municipal advisory activities undertaken. However, Rule G-17 does not merely prohibit deceptive conduct on the part of a municipal advisor. The rule also establishes a general duty of a municipal advisor to deal fairly with all persons, even in the absence of fraud.

Rule G-17 imposes a duty of fair dealing on solicitor municipal advisors when they are soliciting business from municipal entities and obligated persons on behalf of third parties. Again, municipal advisors are reminded that the term “municipal entity” also includes certain entities that do not issue municipal securities. Thus, in addition to owing the specific obligations discussed below to issuers of municipal securities, solicitor municipal advisors also owe such obligations to, for example, state and local government sponsored public pension plans and local government investment pools.

The duty of fair dealing includes, but is not limited to, a duty to disclose to the municipal entity or obligated person being solicited material facts about the solicitation, such as the name of the solicitor’s client; the type of business being solicited; the amount and source of all of the solicitor’s compensation; payments (including in-kind) made by the solicitor to another solicitor municipal advisor (including an affiliate, but not an employee) to facilitate the solicitation regardless of characterization; and any relationships of the solicitor with any employees or board members of the municipal entity or obligated person being solicited or any other persons affiliated with the municipal entity or obligated person or its officials who may have influence over the selection of the solicitor’s client.

Additionally, if a solicitor municipal advisor is engaged by its client to present information about a product or service offered by the third-party client to the municipal entity or obligated person, the solicitor municipal advisor must disclose all material risks and characteristics of the product or service. The solicitor municipal advisor must also advise the municipal entity or obligated person of any incentives received by the solicitor (that are not already disclosed as part of the solicitor municipal advisor’s compensation from its client) to recommend the product or service, as well as any other conflicts of interest regarding the product or service, and must not make material misstatements or omissions when discussing the product or service.

Under the Exchange Act, municipal advisors and their associated persons are deemed to owe a fiduciary duty to their municipal entity clients.[*] Similarly, Rule G-42 (which applies only to non-solicitor municipal advisors) follows the Exchange Act in deeming municipal advisors to owe a fiduciary duty, for purposes of Rule G-42, to such municipal entity clients. However, because a solicitor municipal advisor’s clients are not the municipal entities that they solicit, but rather the third parties that retain or engage the solicitor municipal advisor to solicit such municipal entities, solicitor municipal advisors do not owe a fiduciary duty under the Exchange Act or MSRB rules to their clients (or the municipal entity) in connection with such activity. Nonetheless, as noted above, solicitor municipal advisors are subject to the fair dealing standards under Rule G-17 (including with respect to their clients and the entities that they solicit).


[*] See Order Adopting SEC Final Rule [Release No. 34-70462 (September 20, 2013), 78 FR 67467 (November 12, 2013) (File No. S7-45-10)], at n. 100 (noting that the fiduciary duty of a municipal advisor, as set forth in Section 15B(c)(1) of the Exchange Act, extends only to its municipal entity clients).

Notice 2017-08 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Compliance Resource
Publication date:
Information for:

General Public, Issuers, Municipal Advisors

Rule Number:

Rule G-42

Notice 2017-07 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Notice 2017-06 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Notice 2017-05 - Request for Comment
Publication date: | Comment due:
Information for:

Bank Dealers, Dealers, Municipal Advisors

Rule Number:

Rule G-34

1.  Acacia Financial Group, Inc.: Letter from Noreen P. White, Co-President, and Kim M. Whelan, Co-President, dated March 31, 2017

2.  American Bankers Association: Letter from Cristeena G. Naser, Vice President and Senior Counsel, Center for Securities, Trust and Investment, dated March 24, 2017

3.  Bloomberg, L.P.: Letter from Peter Warms, Senior Manager of Fixed Income, Entity, Regulatory Content and Symbology 

4.  Bond Dealers of America: Letter from Mike Nicholas, Chief Executive Officer, dated March 31, 2017

5.  CUSIP Global Services: Letter from Scott J. Preiss, Managing Director, Global Head, dated March 30, 2017

6.  Dixworks LLC: E-mail from Dennis Dix, Jr., Principal, dated March 29, 2017

7.  First River Advisory LLC: E-mail from Shelley Aronson dated March 22, 2017

8.  George K. Baum & Company: Letter from Guy E. Yandel, EVP and Co-Manager Public Finance, Dana L. Bjornson, EVP, CFO and Chief Compliance Officer, and Andrew F. Sears, EVP and General Counsel, dated March 31, 2017

9.  Government Finance Officers Association: Letter from Emily Brock, Director, Federal Liaison Center, dated March 31, 2017

10.  National Association of Health and Educational Facilities Finance Authorities: Letter from Donna Murr, President, and Martin Walke, Advocacy Committee Chair, dated March 31, 2017

11.  National Association of Municipal Advisors: Letter from Susan Gaffney, Executive Director, dated March 31, 2017

12.  National Federation of Municipal Analysts; Letter from Julie Egan, Chair, and Lisa Washburn, Industry Practices and Procedures Chair, dated March 31, 2017

13.  Opus Bank: E-mail from Dmitry Semenov, Senior Managing Director, Public Finance, dated March 15, 2017

14.  PFM: Letter from Cheryl Maddox, General Counsel, and Leo Karwejna, Chief Compliance Officer, dated March 31, 2017

15.  Phoenix Advisors, LLC: Letter from David B. Thompson, CEO, dated March 21, 2017

16.  Piper Jaffray & Co.: Letter from Frank Fairman, Managing Director, Head of Public Finance Services, and Rebecca Lawrence, Managing Director, Associate General Counsel, Public Finance and Fixed Income, dated March 31, 2017

17.  Rudy Salo: E-mail dated March 31, 2017

18.  Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: Letter from Leslie M. Norwood, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, dated March 31, 2017

19.  SMA: E-mail from Michael Cawley dated March 21, 2017

20.  State of Florida, Division of Bond Finance: Letter from J. Ben Watkins III, Director, dated April 7, 2017

Notice 2017-04 - Request for Comment
Publication date: | Comment due:
Information for:

Bank Dealers, Dealers, Municipal Advisors

Rule Number:

Rule G-21

1.  Acacia Financial Group, Inc.: Letter from Noreen P. White, Co-President, and Kim M. Whelan, Co-President, dated April 7, 2017

2.  Bond Dealers of America: Letter from Mike Nicholas, Chief Executive Officer, dated March 24, 2017

3.  Fidelity Investments: Letter from Norman L. Ashkenas, Chief Compliance Officer, Fidelity Brokerage Services, LLC, Richard J. O'Brien, Chief Compliance Officer, National Financial Services, LLC, and Jason Linde, Chief Compliance Officer, Fidelity Investments Institutional Services Company, LLC, dated March 24, 2017

4.  Financial Services Institute: Letter from David T. Bellaire, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, dated March 24, 2017

5.  Lewis Young Robertson & Burningham, Inc.: Letter from Laura D. Lewis, Principal, dated March 24, 2017

6.  National Association of Municipal Advisors: Letter from Susan Gaffney, Executive Director, dated March 24, 2017

7.  PFM: Letter from Leo Karwejna, Chief Compliance Officer, Cheryl Maddox, General Counsel, and Catherine Humphrey-Bennett, Municipal Advisory Compliance Officer, dated March 23, 2017

8.  Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: Letter from Leslie M. Norwood, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, dated March 24, 2017

9.  Strategic Insight: Letter from Paul Curley, Director of College Savings Research, dated May 16, 2017

10.  Third Party Marketers Association: Letter from Donna DiMaria, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chair of the 3PM Regulatory Committee, dated March 23, 2017

11.  Wells Fargo Advisors: Letter from Robert J. McCarthy, Director of Regulatory Policy, dated March 24, 2017

Notice 2017-03 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Notice 2017-02 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Information for:

Bank Dealers, Dealers, Municipal Advisors

Notice 2017-01 - Request for Comment
Publication date: | Comment due:
Information for:

Bank Dealers, Dealers

Rule Number:

Rule G-26

1.  Bond Dealers of America: Letter from Mike Nicholas, Chief Executive Officer, dated February 17, 2017

2.  Michael Paganini: E-mail dated January 6, 2017

3.  Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: Letter from Leslie M. Norwood, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, dated February 17, 2017

 

Compliance Resource
Publication date:
Notice 2011-68 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Notice 2011-66 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Interpretive Guidance - Interpretive Notices
Publication date:
Guidance on the Prohibition on Underwriting Issues of Municipal Securities for Which a Financial Advisory Relationship Exists Under Rule G-23
Rule Number:

Rule G-23

MSRB Rule G-23 establishes certain basic requirements applicable to a broker, dealer, or municipal securities dealer (“dealer”) acting as a financial advisor with respect to the issuance of municipal securities.  MSRB Rule G-23(d) provides that a dealer that has a financial advisory relationship with respect to the issuance of municipal securities is precluded from acquiring all or any portion of such issue, directly or indirectly, from the issuer as principal, either alone or as a participant in a syndicate or other similar account formed for that purpose.  A dealer is also precluded from arranging the placement of an issue with respect to which it has a financial advisory relationship.  This notice refers to both of these activities as “underwritings” and provides interpretive guidance on when a dealer may be precluded by Rule G-23(d) from underwriting an issue of municipal securities due to having served as financial advisor with respect to that issue.  Rule G-23 is solely a conflicts rule.  Accordingly, this notice does not address whether provision of the advice permitted by Rule G-23 would cause the dealer to be considered a “municipal advisor” under the Exchange Act and the rules promulgated thereunder.

Rule G-23(b) provides, among other things, that a financial advisory relationship shall be deemed to exist for purposes of Rule G-23 when a dealer renders or enters into an agreement to provide financial advisory or consultant services to or on behalf of an issuer with respect to the issuance of municipal securities, including advice with respect to the structure, timing, terms, and other similar matters concerning such issue or issues.  Rule G-23(b) also provides, however, that a financial advisory relationship shall not be deemed to exist when, in the course of acting as an underwriter and not as a financial advisor, a dealer provides advice to an issuer, including advice with respect to the structure, timing, terms, and other similar matters concerning the issuance of municipal securities.

Although Rule G-23(c) requires a financial advisory relationship to be evidenced by a writing, a financial advisory relationship will be deemed to exist whenever a dealer renders the types of advice provided for in Rule G-23(b), regardless of the existence of a written agreement.  However, a dealer that clearly identifies itself in writing as an underwriter and not as a financial advisor from the earliest stages of its relationship with the issuer with respect to that issue (e.g., in a response to a request for proposals or in promotional materials provided to an issuer) will be considered to be “acting as an underwriter” under Rule G-23(b) with respect to that issue.  The writing must make clear that the primary role of an underwriter is to purchase, or arrange for the placement of, securities in an arm’s-length commercial transaction between the issuer and the underwriter and that the underwriter has financial and other interests that differ from those of the issuer.  The dealer must not engage in a course of conduct that is inconsistent with an arm’s-length relationship with the issuer in connection with such issue of municipal securities or the dealer will be deemed to be a financial advisor with respect to that issue and precluded from underwriting that issue by Rule G-23(d).  Thus, a dealer providing advice to an issuer with respect to the issuance of municipal securities (including the structure, timing, and terms of the issue and other similar matters, when integrally related to the issue being underwritten) will not be viewed as a financial advisor for purposes of Rule G-23, if such advice is rendered in its capacity as underwriter for such issue.  In addition to engaging in underwriting activities, it shall not be a violation of Rule G-23(d) for a dealer that states that it is acting as an underwriter with respect to the issuance of municipal securities to provide advice with respect to the investment of the proceeds of the issue, municipal derivatives integrally related to the issue, or other similar matters concerning the issue.

Notice 2011-65 - Informational Notice
Publication date:
Notice 2011-63 - Request for Comment
Publication date: | Comment due:

1.  Alternative Regulatory Solutions, L.L.C.: Letter from Kimberly McManus, President, dated December 13, 2011

2.  Bond Dealers of America: Letter from Michael Nicholas, CEO, dated December 13, 2011

3.  Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: Letter from David L. Cohen, Managing Director, Associate General Counsel, dated December 13, 2011

4.  TMC Bonds L.L.C.: Letter from John S. Craft, Director of Sales and Marketing, dated December 13, 2011

Print