For inter-dealer transactions, there is no specific requirement for brokers, dealers or municipal securities dealers (individually and collectively, “dealers”) to disclose all material facts to another dealer at time of trade. A selling dealer is not generally charged with the responsibility to ensure that the purchasing dealer knows all relevant features of the municipal securities being offered for sale. The selling dealer may rely, at least to a reasonable extent, on the fact that the purchasing dealer is also a professional and will satisfy their need for information prior to entering into a contract for the municipal securities.

 

The items of information that professionals in an inter-dealer transaction must exchange at or prior to the time of trade are governed by principles of contract law and essentially are those items necessary adequately to describe the municipal security that is the subject of the contract. As a general matter, these items of information do not encompass all material facts, but should be sufficient to distinguish the municipal security from other similar issues. The Board has interpreted Rule G-17 to require dealers to treat other dealers fairly and to hold them to the prevailing ethical standards of the industry. The rule also prohibits dealers from knowingly misdescribing municipal securities to another dealer. As a result, it is possible that non-disclosure of an unusual feature might constitute an unfair practice and thus become a violation of Rule G-17 even in an inter-dealer transaction.

 

For example, with respect to bonds that prepay principal, non-disclosure of the fact that a bond prepays principal could be a violation of Rule G-17. This would be especially true if the information about the prepayment feature is not accessible to the market and is intentionally withheld by the selling dealer. Whether or not non-disclosure constitutes an unfair practice in a specific case would depend upon the individual facts of the case. However, to avoid trade disputes and settlement delays in inter-dealer transactions, it generally is in dealers’ interest to reach specific agreement on the existence of any prepayment feature and the amount of unpaid principal that will be delivered.