Defendant Name: TD Ameritrade, Inc.

Defendant Type: Subsidiary of Public Company
Public Company Parent: The Toronto-Dominion Bank
SIC Code: 6210
CUSIP: 87236Y10

Initial Case Details

Legal Case Name In the Matter of TD Ameritrade, Inc.
First Document Date 03-Feb-2011
Initial Filing Format Administrative Action
File Number 3-14225
Allegation Type Broker Dealer

Violations Alleged

Failed reasonably to supervise its representatives within the meaning of Section 15(b)(4)(E) Exchange Act


First Resolution Date 03-Feb-2011

Related Documents:

2011-36 03-Feb-2011 Press Release--Administrative Proceeding
SEC Charges TD Ameritrade for Failing to Supervise Its Representatives Who Sold Shares of the Reserve Yield Plus Fund
On February 3, 2011, the SEC announced that it "charged TD Ameritrade Inc. for failing to reasonably supervise its registered representatives, some of whom mislead customers when selling shares of the Reserve Yield Plus Fund, a mutual fund that 'broke the buck' in September 2008."
34-63829 03-Feb-2011 Administrative Proceeding
Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings Pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions
On February 3, 2011, the SEC instituted settled administrative proceedings against TD Ameritrade, Inc. According to the SEC: "From approximately January 18, 2007 through September 16, 2008 (the 'relevant period'), Respondent failed reasonably to supervise its registered representatives with a view to preventing their violations of Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 ('Securities Act') in connection with their offer and sale of shares in the Reserve Yield Plus Fund, a mutual fund managed by The Reserve (the 'RYP Fund' or 'Fund'). Although Respondent developed and deployed training materials specifically regarding the Fund, in offering the Fund to Respondent's customers during the relevant period, Respondent's representatives at times mischaracterized the Fund as a money market fund, as safe as cash, or as an investment with guaranteed liquidity, and other times failed to disclose the nature or risks of the Fund. Respondent failed to establish policies and procedures and a system to implement the procedures which would reasonably be expected to prevent and detect such violative conduct by its representatives in the offer and sale of the Fund."