All of the following most likely apply to Myers’ participation as a partner in the software company EXCEPT:
A) |
Standard IV (B.4)—Priority of Transactions. | |
B) |
Standard IV (B.5)—Preservation of Confidentiality. | |
C) |
Standard III (C)—Disclosure of Conflicts to Employer. | |
Standard VI(B)—Priority of Transactions most likely does not apply to Myers’ participation in the software company. Standard VI(B) covers priority over transactions in securities or other investments for clients and employers to prevent any instances of “front-running” for the benefit of the member. Myers’ software business is not transaction-oriented, and there is no information that describes any instances of the software company having priority in securities transactions over Ironclad or its clients. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a,b)
As part of Ironclad’s portfolio management activities on behalf of clients, Harrison and Myers maintain relationships with third party soft dollar providers and commission recapture brokers.
- Better Trading Brokerage (“Better Trading”), one of Ironclad’s top ten brokers and soft dollar providers, has offered Harrison two round-trip airline tickets anywhere in the U.S. in appreciation for their two-year relationship with Ironclad.
- One of Harrison’s clients, Worldwind Travel (“Worldwind”), who participates in commission recapture, has offered Harrison two round-trip airline tickets anywhere in the U.S. or Europe in appreciation for their two-year relationship with Ironclad.
Which of the following best describes Harrison’s actions under the Code and Standards? Harrison:
A) |
can accept the offer from both Better Trading and Worldwind. | |
B) |
can accept the offer from Worldwind, but cannot accept the offer from Better Trading. | |
C) |
cannot accept the offer from either Better Trading or Worldwind. | |
Subject to additional disclosure, Harrison can accept the offer from Worldwind, but cannot accept the offer from Better Trading. Harrison’s actions are covered by Standard I(B)—Independence and Objectivity. Under Standard I(B), members shall use reasonable care and judgment to achieve and maintain independence and objectivity in their professional activities. As such, Harrison’s acceptance of the offer from Better Trading could be perceived to compromise his independence and objectivity on behalf of his clients, as the broker may be trying to influence Harrison to increase the amount of trading that Ironclad executes on behalf of clients. Since Better Trading is not a client of Ironclad, and its offer could negatively influence Harrison’s actions on behalf of Ironclad’s clients in violation of the Standard, the offer should be refused. The offer from Worldwind, who is one of Ironclad’s clients, if accepted, does not cause Harrison to violate Standard I(B). Gifts from clients are distinguishable from gifts from third parties seeking to influence the activities of an investment manager. Worldwind’s offer to Harrison may be accepted, provided it is disclosed to Ironclad in writing as additional compensation or benefits. Standard IV(B)—Additional Compensation Arrangements requires members to disclose in writing any additional compensation or other benefits received for their services in addition those provided by their employer. Harrison is obligated to disclose the offer and abide by any further requirements set forth by Ironclad prior to accepting the tickets. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a,b)
Myers has disclosed her partnership interest in the software company to Harrison, including the potential for additional compensation and the possible conflicts of interest.
- One of Myers’ software clients, Breakthrough Pharmaceuticals (“Breakthrough”), is a publicly-traded corporation that is also held in portfolios of Ironclad’s clients. In the course of their business relationship, Breakthrough’s chief executive officer (CEO) informs Myers that the company has been experiencing problems making retirement benefit payments, and its pension plan has recently gone from “overfunded” to “significantly underfunded” as a result of market conditions.
- Breakthrough’s CEO indicates to Myers that he is attempting to source additional short-term financing to make retiree benefit payments and will disclose the significant “underfunded status” of the pension plan in the upcoming financial statements.
- Myers, concerned about Ironclad clients holding stock of Breakthrough given the impact on earnings from the current pension troubles and short-term liquidity issues, informs Harrison of the impending disclosure.
- Ironclad sells 1,800,000 shares of Breakthrough for clients, causing the price to drop $4 per share.
- Upon disclosure of the pension troubles, Breakthrough’s stock dropped 18%.
According to Standard II—Integrity of Capital Markets, Myers has:
A) |
violated the Standard by sharing material nonpublic information with Harrison. | |
B) |
not violated the Standard since the information shared with Harrison was used to fulfill Ironclad’s fiduciary duty to avoid significant losses. | |
C) |
not violated the Standard by sharing material nonpublic information with Harrison because the information did not involve a tender offer. | |
Although the information shared by Myers may have helped Ironclad’s clients avoid losses in shares of Breakthrough, the information was material nonpublic information. In this example, Myers’ software company owes a duty of loyal and confidentiality to Breakthrough. Information is “material” if its disclosure would have an impact on the stock or if a reasonable investor would want to know the information prior to making an investment decision. Material is “nonpublic” until it has been generally disseminated to the marketplace and investors have had an opportunity to react to the information. The information about Breakthrough’s pension difficulties was both material and nonpublic, as the stock dropped significantly upon disclosure of the information in the market. Therefore, Myers had a duty to keep the information confidential and not to trade, or cause others to trade, on the information. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a,b) |