BMO firms to pay $37M for misleading clients
By 
Kyle Brasseur2019-09-30T18:12:00
Two BMO advisory firms have agreed to pay over $37 million in a settlement with the SEC for misleading clients on aspects of their retail investment advisory program.
Related articles
-
News BriefTexas sues Johnson & Johnson, Kenvue over alleged misleading marketing of Tylenol
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued two pharmaceutical companies for ”deceptively marketing Tylenol to pregnant mothers” despite risks linked to autism. The filing came two days before HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared to walk back the claims.
-
ArticleRole for compliance as FCA urges U.K. asset managers to take up tokenization tech
The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has opened a consultation on its plans to support “tokenization” – the digital representation of assets on distributed ledger technology (DLT). It is calling for firms to respond to the consultation before November 21. The financial regulator said in a press release on Oct. ...
-
OpinionThe CFO, AI, and the New Compliance Frontier
As CFOs use AI to streamline operations, they face new compliance risks tied to accountability and algorithmic governance. CCOs must work with them to ensure transparency and oversight throughout adoption.
More from Regulatory Enforcement
-
News BriefCFPB scraps bad-actor registry, citing cost-benefit issues
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau shut down a registry of non-bank financial firms that broke consumer laws. The agency cites the costs being ”not justified by the speculative and unquantified benefits to consumers.”
-
ArticleSenate Democrats question Vought on comments about closing CFPB in months
Senate Democrats warned OMB Director Russell Vought Tuesday that it would be illegal for the Trump administration to shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, citing a recent court decision barring actions that could severely harm the agency.
-
PremiumAssessing the impact of the DOJ’s monitorship policy six months in
It has been nearly six months now since the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Criminal Division released its memorandum on the selection of compliance monitors. This article provides a critical analysis of the monitorships that received early terminations, those that remain in place, and the broader compliance lessons they impart.