- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Aaron Nicodemus2023-11-08T20:10:00
A New York state law that takes effect next year will make it more difficult for registered investment advisers (RIAs) in the state to conduct proactive testing for violations of their firms’ off-channel communication policies.
The law, A836, signed by Gov. Kathy Hochul on Sept. 14, prohibits an employer “from requesting or requiring that an employee or applicant disclose any username, password, or other means for accessing a personal account through specified electronic communications devices.” The law takes effect 180 days after passage, in March.
The law contains a carve-out for entities that are required to monitor or retain employee communications “under federal law or by a self-regulatory organization,” and there lies the rub for RIAs. While all communications by broker-dealers are required to be monitored and retained by federal securities law, only communications that specifically deal with investment advice are required to be monitored and retained by RIAs.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec.
Annual Membership best value
Subscribe now for $365
Our lowest price ($1 per day) for one year.
Establishing a set of policies and procedures to prevent employee use of nonauthorized electronic communications to conduct business is relatively straightforward. The hard part is monitoring compliance.
New York hospitals would be required to have a cybersecurity program that includes regular cyber risk assessments under newly proposed regulations.
Firms monitoring employee use of off-channel communications for business purposes face numerous obstacles. How much is enough, in the opinion of regulators? How much is too much, in the eyes of employees? Determinations must be made as regulators crack down.
The U.S. Supreme Court extended the statute of limitations for businesses attempting to challenge some federal regulations, allowing regulated entities a longer timeline to appeal a decision.
The Supreme Court of the United States overturned a long-held precedent in which courts deferred to federal agencies in interpreting complex or ambiguous regulations–a decision that could make thousands of federal regulations more vulnerable to legal challenges.
Financial institutions would be required to conduct more thorough risk assessments on their anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism programs under a new rule proposed by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
