(Image: Shutterstock)
As we approach the 10-year anniversary of Dodd-Frank's municipal advisor antifraud and registration provisions, which takes place on Oct. 1, several trends are converging that may put municipal advisors in the SEC's crosshairs.
Historically, the SEC's enforcement actions against issuers of municipal bonds often look very similar to the actions brought against issuers of other securities.
So, for example, a few years ago, the New York and New Jersey Port Authority paid $400,000 to settle SEC claims the Port Authority violated the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws in connection with a $2.3 billion bond offering.
The Port Authority admitted failing to disclose to investors known material risks surrounding the potential lack of legal authority to fund the projects described in the bond offering documents. This and dozens of other, similar SEC cases are fairly routine stuff as against securities issuers.
However, in 2010 the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act contained a municipal advisor antifraud provision that for the first time specifically applied to the many advisors who assist municipal entities with bond offerings, reinvestment of bond proceeds, and structuring and pricing of related products.
It took the SEC six years after Dodd-Frank became effective before it used its new tool to bring an enforcement action for the first time against a municipal advisor.
'Opening of Floodgates'
The SEC's first case applying the municipal advisor antifraud provision involved a small, California-based advisor to several school districts who allegedly shared confidential information with financial professionals being considered by the school districts for certain advisory contracts. The advisory firm paid a small fine to settle the matter.
But the floodgates opened: since that first 2016 case, the SEC has brought several more enforcement actions against municipal advisors. Until the middle of 2019.
