West Virginia 2022 Regular Session

West Virginia House Bill HB4314

Introduced
1/21/22  

Caption

Exclude Solicitor from the definition of Investment Advisor

Impact

The proposed changes are expected to reduce the regulatory burden on individuals operating as solicitors, who generally provide referral services rather than direct investment advice. This shift would directly affect state laws pertaining to how investment advisory services are defined and regulated, potentially leading to a more favorable operating environment for solicitors within the investment community. Stakeholders believe this could encourage more investment activity by reducing confusion regarding regulatory requirements.

Summary

House Bill 4314 seeks to amend the West Virginia Uniform Securities Act by specifically excluding solicitors from the definition of investment advisers. This legislative change is significant as it clarifies the regulatory scope surrounding individuals who engage in the solicitation of clients for investment advice and aims to streamline the compliance process for those involved in the financial services sector. By delineating who qualifies as an investment adviser, the bill provides greater clarity to both regulators and practitioners in the field.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 4314 is largely supportive among those in the financial industry. Advocates argue that by excluding solicitors from being classified as investment advisers, the bill promotes a more efficient regulatory framework that allows for a more agile and responsive financial services environment. Critics, however, have raised concerns regarding potential consumer protection issues, questioning whether the measure might dilute standards of accountability and oversight within investment practices.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential for confusion regarding the roles of solicitors versus licensed investment advisers. Critics worry that if solicitors do not adhere to the same standards as investment advisers, consumers may inadvertently be led to trust individuals who do not bear the same regulatory obligations. As the bill moves forward, it will be essential to ensure that consumer protections remain strong, even as certain professionals are exempted from rigorous oversight.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CT HB05053

An Act Concerning Transparency And Disclosure.

MS HB849

Securities laws; provide certain exemptions regarding blockchain tokens.

MS HB1154

Securities laws; provide certain exemptions regarding blockchain tokens.

MT SB265

Revise cryptocurrency laws to create Financial Freedom and Innovation Act

MS HB1529

Income tax; revise definition of gross income and authorize deduction for certain expenses.

MS HB1498

Income tax; revise definition of gross income and authorize deduction for certain expenses.

CA AB3008

Political Reform Act of 1974: compensation from tribal governments.

CT HB05114

An Act Applying The Provisions Of The Connecticut Uniform Securities Act To The Requirement That Broker-dealers Comply With The Currency And Foreign Transactions Reporting Act.