Was curious to get some thoughts on the following question.
One of the mock exams has a question that goes something like this:
John Smith, CFA, is a broker and notices one of his clients, Matt Brown, PhD seems to always be picking winning stocks. John Smith decides to mimick the trades of his client for his personal account only, but only after the trades for his client have been executed. Has Smith violated the code of ethics?
The answer to this question is no, he hasn’t. Because even though he doesn’t have a reasonable basis for making trading decisions he’s doing it for his personal account only.
Here’s what I’m curious about. Suppose John Smith is married and has a joint trading account with his wife, THEN is he violating the code of ethics because the account is both his AND his wifes? My thoughts are that this would be a violation since the “reasonable basis” now applies because his wife’s account should be treated like any other client - neither advantaged nor disadvantaged
But my real question is this:
However, suppose John is married and does not have a joint account. He still has a fidiciary obligation to his spouse and his family (this is the basis upon which divorce proceedings decide alimony), and so in a legal sense his trading decisions may hae a material affect on the quality of life of those relying on him. In this case, can he trade without a reasonable basis?
i.e. can anyone with a CFA (or enrolled in a CFA program) make a trading or investment decision without reasonable basis if they have someone that could potentially lay claim to their assets without violating the code of ethics? |
发表于 2013-5-3 15:40
|