-2
$\begingroup$

Beth Anderson, FRM, is a portfolio manager for several wealthy clients including Reuben Carlyle. Anderson manages Carlyle's personal portfolio of stock and bond investments. Carlyle recently told Anderson that he is under investigation by the IRS for tax evasion related to his business, Carlyle Concrete (CC). After learning about the investigation, Anderson proceeds to inform a friend at a local investment bank so that they may withdraw their proposal to take CC public. Which of the following is most likely correct? Anderson:

A. violated the Code by failing to immediately terminate the client relationship with Carlyle.

B. violated the Code by failing to maintain the confidentiality of her client's information.

C. violated the Code by failing to detect and report the tax evasion to the proper authorities.

D. did not violate the Code since the information she conveyed pertained to illegal activities on the part of her client.

I wonder why choice A and choice C are not correct.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about quantitative finance. $\endgroup$ Oct 16, 2017 at 22:34

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Keep in mind that "under investigation" is not the same as "guilty of". Instead the answer is clearly B, what is she doing giving information to "a friend" at another firm, under what justification?

The tax evasion may or may not have taken place. If it took place it took place at Carlyle Concrete, which she has nothing to do with since she just manages his personal investments. It is not her job to detect fraud at the Concrete Company, so she has not failed to do her duty. As far as "reporting information to the authorities" what sense does that make since the information is that "the IRS (i.e. the tax authorities!) have started an investigation", she could report that to the IRS but they would laugh, they already know that. Instead she provided a "tip" to a friend to help the friend get a promotion at another investment bank!

The general principle: she has a duty to report illegal activity that she knows of (facts or admissions of fact, not allegations, investigations, rumors) to authorities (not to "friends"), other than that she has to keep her mouth shut about information she has about her client. The duty of confidentiality for an investment advisor is very strong, over-ruled only to report crimes.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.