b. Provides that \"ignorance of the law is not a defense\" to imprisonment for \
ID: 2804258 • Letter: B
Question
b. Provides that "ignorance of the law is not a defense" to imprisonment for "willfur au y indviduals, but not securities fraud c. Provides for criminal prosecution of insider trading by the SEC d. Provides jail sentences up to 20 years for "willful" violations of Rule 10b-5 8. In United States v. Martoma, the Second Circuit reasoned that- Only an officer, director or employee of a company can be an "insider" subject to insider trading prosecution under Rule 10b-5 A "tippee" must give a financial reward to the insider-tipster to be guilty of a 10b-5 insider trading violation a. b. gift of inside information is the same as trading on the information and gifting the profits for purposes of insider trading prosecution A recipient of material non-public information from a corporate consultant may never trade on that information without violating Rule 10b-5 c. A d. 29. Which of the following is NOT a principal objective of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934? a. To regulate securities exchanges b. To regulate securities broker-dealers c. To regulate secondary trading in securities d. To regulate private equity funds 30. Which of the following corporate events does NOT trigger a requirement to file a Form 8-k wilth the SEC? a. Termination of a merger agreement Agreement on principal merger termsExplanation / Answer
28.) In United States v Marotoma case, the Second Circuit reasoned that a gift of inside information is same as trading on the information and gifting the profits for purposes of insider trading prosecution.
This is because trading on the information is like trading himself and then delivering the cash returns as the gift.
Hence, Option-c is the right answer.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.